Squarely on Ronald McDonald.

Via Volokh via Insty.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

Very smart.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 04:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

It's our pleasure: Legos and cheese all around.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:17 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ask yourself this question: Was Mohammed a nose-picker?

Posted by: smitty at February 11, 2006 12:10 PM (ozLpm)

2 Here is something for Cheese lovers: http://www.milkgonewild.com/

Posted by: Carl Atteniese at February 11, 2006 10:12 PM (arxXo)

3 I'm partial to Havarti cheese.

Posted by: Dalsan at February 12, 2006 05:02 PM (mSxUF)

4 Trust our PETA friend to deliver the facts. OK PETA, stand and deliver! I'll take a gallon. I'll make it easier for you, 2% please! Gives new meaning to the old adage about "why buy the milk..."

Posted by: Darrell at February 12, 2006 08:55 PM (jM8RY)

5 Milk is probably my most persistent addiction. I put it in cereal, I drink it with peanut butter and jelly. I actually would like to see farming practices become more humane, and I'm willing to pay more for "free range" eggs for that reason. But I'm not interested in silly stuff like tracking hormones and chemicals. I do pay a premium for milk, since I live in a dairy-producing state, and we have protectionist policies in place. But I rather suspect Denmark's farming practices are some of the most humane in the world. It's freaking Denmark, for crying out loud.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 13, 2006 06:15 AM (F7zrJ)

6 Did you take a look at that link(milk gone wild?) PETA seems to have a fascination with human females with six udders. I've never know a PETA woman that intimately to say that isn't the case...And as a Capitalist, I'm all for competition. And the adage is "why buy the cow..." But I was too afraid of your physical violence to type it correctly. As far as your concerns, well, then, you are in luck. Most milk in this country comes from relatively small dairy farms that sell to processing plants. I see the cows, and the conditions under which they live, and they seem pretty good, and pretty much the same as they have always been. The dairy farmers treat their cows with love, pretty much what you would expect with the symbiotic relationship they have going. The vets that work these prectices seem to be female from what I have seen, and seem to be so much more into the care of these animals than should be expected in a normal business sense. Both farmers and vets stay with the animals all night when necessary-- for example when they are giving birth. The vets are concerned with the health and wellbeing of their patients, and use medicines accordingly. My experience is limited to Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Iowa, and a few Eastern States like Vermont, but I suspect that it is pretty much the case in the entire US. You don't get into anything that resembles "big business" until you get into the processing/distribution end of the business, and by then, only human animals are to be found.

Posted by: Darrell at February 13, 2006 09:35 AM (++mZq)

7 Oh, yeah, D--I couldn't figure out that "cow" remark . . . I will follow the link, but my intuition was that cows are well-cared-for. I do worry about chickens, however.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 13, 2006 08:20 PM (Is4ds)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

How many of you are there?

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:59 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . that the French have pig-squealing contests?

I'm disappointed in the current crop of agent provocateurs— you'd think they could come up with better anti-Islamic art to "sweeten the pie." And that it would take them less than four months to "sell" their brethren on firebombs and the burning of Danish flags. (Of course, as others have pointed out, the gap between October and the current OUTRAGE! might be due to their difficulties in scrounging up so many Scandinavian flags.)

h/t: Glenn.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:21 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . if ancient artifacts precious to them were destroyed like this?

Buddhists didn't riot. They didn't firebomb anything, or threaten beheadings.

It's hard to look at the lunatic fringe of Islam and really regard this as a true religion, rather than a sick death cult. That's just how I feel right now: I don't see enough moderate Muslims getting outraged by those who do violence in their name.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.

The ultimate caricatures of Mohammed—but I've never heard the Islamic community say a word about them. Hm.

Via Goldstein, who appears to be skating on pretty thin ice.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . more than Casanova:

Very few societies are genuinely multicultural. Most are bicultural: On the one hand, there are folks who are black, white, gay, straight, pre-op transsexual, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, worshippers of global-warming doom-mongers, and they rub along as best they can. And on the other hand are folks who do not accept the give-and-take, the rough-and-tumble of a "diverse" "tolerant" society, and, when one gently raises the matter of their intolerance, they threaten to kill you, which makes the question somewhat moot.

Via Never Yet Melted.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.

One opinion.

Let's see. Irreverence toward Jesus Christ: we have this. And this. This counts, I think. You'll want to turn the sound down for this. And few people, Christian or not, can resist this. Another one. And, of course, this. Don't forget this one.

This one would appear to skewer all faiths—until you consider its name.

That's going four pages into a search for "Jesus." Here's a bonus for you.

Just off the top of my head, we have a few that focus on Catholics. Like this. And this. And this.

This situation surely deserves an honorable mention. And this theme is an evergreen.

Protestants? Well, there are so many brands. But this likely qualifies. As does this. Definitely counts. I'd include this as well.

Moses: Well, there's this. And this.

With respect to Jews in general, of course, we find the most hilarious joke of all time. Ha ha. I mean, these guys just kill me. Oh, wait . . . And here's more lighthearted fun.

Four pages into a search for "Mohammed prophet" (to, ahem, distinguish the prophet from some of the colorful characters that share his name) I got this. Let's also throw this one in.

Sorry, Azmat. I just don't see it.

UPDATE: Glenn has a roundup of commentary on the Islamic double standard.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:26 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 3 kb.

It doesn't get clearer than "behead those who insult Islam." Malkin has the pix of those who follow the "religion of peace." Please note that these people are living in a Western country, and taking advantage of Western education/standards of living/freedoms.

Wouldn't it be an interesting exercise to go into Muslim-run schools and check out their textbooks? We would see some major-league slander of Jews. But presumably that's different.

UPDATE: Via Glenn, Sissy Willis reports that public sentiment is turning dramatically, at least in Great Britain.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.

It appears that Goldstein doesn't like the idea of journalists being bullied with threats of physical violence into a practice of "tolerance" that places Muslims above all other religious groups on the planet:

Even now you have Kos commenters contorting themselves into positions of self-righteous progressive onanism that are a wonder to behold—suddenly, free speech is not a universal right worthy of the crafting of puppet heads and the defacing of Starbucks’ windows, but instead is a culture-specific gift that needs to be filtered through the religious precepts of the culture of the Other. Unless, of course, that “Other” happens to be, say, Evangelical Christians. In which case, such extremists MUST BE SHOUTED DOWN with free speech.

Yup. Read the whole thing.

Meanwhile, Harrell tells us enough is enough, and we should stop reprinting the cartoons:

Yes. ItÂ’s all true. The Muslims who think people who draw their religious figures should be beheaded are backwards and primitive and uncivilized. Unwarranted beheading is pretty much the textbook definition of backwards and primitive and uncivilized. We can all agree about that.

But hasnÂ’t the point been made? HavenÂ’t we gotten the message out by now? Seriously, are we not at this point acting like school-yard bullies, making fun of that one little kid in class just to make him cry?

I just can't see it that way. In my mind, the Muslims are the bullies here, trying to force the rest of the world into granting a special status to their religion with threats of violence.

The Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons is the equivalent of burning a cross on the front lawn of Western Civilization. And if we respect their wishes because of intimidation, we will have granted them a right to dictate what speech is acceptable all around the globe.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

Beautiful Atrocities reprises some of his best-known Muslim-bashing p-shops.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

Every religion gets made fun of: how many comedy skits feature people dressed as nuns or priests? How about the Church Lady? Evangelical Christians get it a lot—and so do Jews. Not to mention what we do to New Agers.

Or is the fuss about these cartoons all some sort of performance art? Perhaps this is a deliberate irony about the supposed slander of those who suggest that Islam isn't always "the religion of peace." The case of Theo Van Gogh, of course, suggests otherwise.

But if you're intent upon blowing us up anyway—whether you see offensive cartoons or not—what exactly is the incentive supposed to be for the Western world to hold back from pointing out that you're intent upon blowing us up?

Memo to the human race: Support Islamic Reformation. Or die.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:15 AM | Comments (139) | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

1 THANK you. I was arguing this with Dave Schuler over at Glittering Eye, who was applauding bloggers for knocking Danish cartoonists' insensitivity, which is pretty presumptuous given the risks they're taking on

Posted by: beautifulatrocities at February 04, 2006 07:22 AM (aIJ7w)

2 We've all been targeted by at least a million actice "fatwas" over the years...What's one more?

Posted by: Darrell at February 04, 2006 09:23 AM (0YAge)

3 My husband points out that some of the rhetoric about free speech will probably die down once the first journalist is killed for publishing these cartoons, or similar ones. Which is probably cynical of him, but not necessarily at odds with reality.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 04, 2006 10:55 AM (XbEp3)

4 That was "active,"by the way, in the above... No one wants to take the responsibility of getting actual people killed, so it's quite understandable that everyone will pull back. Something must be done, that's for sure. We have to decide what we are willing to do, as a nation and as a people. Keep it up all you crazies out there, you're making the decision easy!

Posted by: Darrell at February 04, 2006 12:44 PM (hNr9Z)

5 Dear Anita, You have no idea about the sentiments that Muslims have on this particular issue. Nor is it possible that you would ever understand such sentiments, because you have no such shared experience. I have lived in the west for 30 years and I can relate to both the east and the west. And it is still pretty hard for me to draw an analogy or paint a scenario for you, because we in the west do not have such emotions and passions about any thing! My personal opinion is that this form of attack on Islam is a deliberate attempt of the Bush administration, they knew that the Muslim world would respond irrationally on this issue. Certainly, there is evidence to show how muslims have reacted to any depiction of the prophet in the past, in the same manner. Nobody is intent on blowing you up, but you must understand that if a super power is bent on fighting Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, and killing hundreds of innocent people, there will be a few crazy people from these places that may want to take revenge. Now I have been a muslim all my life and I do not identify myself with Either Iraq, iran or Afghanistan. But even at a distance I can see that this is a clever political attack, to justify a war with Iran. Then the Bush adminstration can point to Syria or Lebonon, Or Pakistan and say, hey the terrorists live there as well. Two more yaers and all this BS will be over and we can all go back to normal.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 04, 2006 07:11 PM (GtDum)

6 Dear Mr. Hussein, Why bring politics into a religious controversy. Muslims such as you have no tolerance for any attacks on your religion but your religious followers are allowed to destroy any infidel at will because they do not believe as you do, in a human being that put his pants (or gown) on as any other man. Unfortunately with the attitude of most Muslims I do not think that in 2 years all this BS will be back to normal given the history of Islam. Why can't human beings get along without all this religious crap. the question I have as a westerner is how can you, as a reasoning human being, accuse persons who had nothing to do with these harmeless cartoons as being part of a conspiracy John Lennon was right. IMAGINE a world without religion. Think about it!

Posted by: Jeff at February 04, 2006 08:17 PM (vbzWO)

7 Jeff, I'm hoping your misspelling of the name was unintentional. If you were trying to insult Mr. Hussain, it was extremely inappropriate, and I don't go for that stuff on my website. Say what you like about me, but don't attack other commenters.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 04, 2006 08:24 PM (XbEp3)

8 Azmat, 1) if the Bush Administration were behind this, it would have occurred here in the States, where we have legal protections for free speech and freedom of the press. I can't buy the idea that G.W. Bush can manipulate a little local Danish paper into publishing this sort of thing. 2) If Muslims would stop blowing things up, they would be less likely to be the targets of cartoons that suggest Muslims like to blow things up. 3) When I see Musllim protesters carrying signs that suggest those who engage in satire should be killed, I feel like there is an attempt to bully the Western world into giving Islam a special status that no other religion enjoys. Again: Christians and Jews get made fun of all the time. 4) No one would be seeing these cartoons except for the fact that Muslims are so outraged by them, and are burning Danish flags, attacking embassies, etc. The more Muslims protest, the more these cartoons will be seen. Danish Muslims could have simply shrugged and said, "stupid ignorant journalists; what can you do? Pisses me off, but we need to tolerate Westerners as Westerners tolerate us." And then no one outside of one little Danish town would have seen these images. 5) There is no way around the fact that Muslims in Europe are asking for acceptance from the West, but not accepting the traditions of the West. There is a double standard: one for infidels, and a lower one for their own behavior.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 04, 2006 08:43 PM (XbEp3)

9 I was not allowed to post a reply.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 04, 2006 10:49 PM (GtDum)

10 Please try again. I'm part of a blogging collective, and sometimes there is an attack of "comment spam." At these times, the comments shut down on all of our blogs, usually for 5-30 minutes. I understand it's an annoyance to my readers, but it appears to be a necessary precaution, unless we want to be flooded with advertisements.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 04, 2006 10:58 PM (XbEp3)

11 Perhaps beacuse it was too long? So I'll be precise. 1. Bush administration tends to do its dirty work abroad, Gitmo, Abu Gharib, Cia Torture in Asia, And Africa. Anyone who blows himself or someone else withdraws himself from the religion of Isam, because it is UnIslamic to kill or to commit suicide. Muslims do not want special status, you just do not understand the level of outrage that they experience, as this falls in the category of hate speech. I have lived in US for the last five years, and in this society you are not judged by what color of skin or which religion or which club you belong to. It is not that Muslims are asking for special privilige, all that is being asked is to uphold the Law and not discriminate on the basis of religion. Hate speech against Jews would not be tolerated nor against christians. So why make an exception for Muslims?

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 04, 2006 11:00 PM (GtDum)

12 where were all these so called MUSLIMS when hundreds innocent childrens were killed by.Billions people like me would not have known about these cartoons,if the muslims had not made such a fuss.You can see hundreds pictures of Mohamad on internet & now cartoons as well>What is wrong with this.Why these muslims do not protest when Budha statue was blown up by Talibans.Aid workers kidnapped and beheaded allover the world by these Muslims and all video tape shown on Muslim channels ,why there was no protest? YOu never protesred in u r countries .Dennmark is not a muslim country no one has the right to tell them how they should live, same way as USA has no right to ask Iraqis or Pelasstanians to do what they donot want . There are hundered different things ,holly for different religions.DO you think A Sikh should ask stop cutting hairs to all world because hair cutting is against his religion or a Hindu should ask Saudi's or Muslim stop slaughtering COWS ,because these are holly to them Will you Mulims apologize for your wrong doings.Just one last question all over the world only Muslims are fighting with with others where ever they are? In Russia, China ,they are fighting with comunists in India Against Hindus, against Jews,against westerens,against Dannish,Shia against Suni,Arab against black Affricans in Niegeria against Catholics.All world is bad only Jihadi Killer are good @ the name of mighty A .. ha ha ha

Posted by: Neeru at February 04, 2006 11:32 PM (SvEn6)

13 I can't help but wonder at the mindset of someone who believes that the appearance of a cartoon in a small Danish newspaper is the work of the insidious Bush cabal. Seriously. I have a hard time not completely rejecting everything else out of hand, when I see something so outlandish. As IF Bush had any need for more irrational frothing Muslims... That would seem just a TAD counterproductive to this cat.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 05, 2006 12:30 AM (xdX36)

14 Aslam is a killer religion because I always see a bad thing about muslim do, every where ,however I never see any other religin do that Why????????????. also They can have up to 4 wifes Because they want to grow fast. but even with that they still not the bigest yat. so muslim please grow up thank you and god our jesus be with you all

Posted by: raj at February 05, 2006 01:33 AM (OpyxE)

15 Okay. I'm going to have to invoke my rule of "one screen name per commenter." Don't make me look up your IP.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 05, 2006 01:44 AM (XbEp3)

16 The cartoon of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban ‘unfortunately’ depicts Muslims as violent people, but even more unfortunate is that their reactions confirmed it.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 05, 2006 07:07 AM (4nAIn)

17 ok you think this is harmless but it is not. there are comedy skits feturing other religions but they dont mock jesus do they? or guru nanak?or moses?

Posted by: honeyy at February 05, 2006 07:36 AM (7XfCj)

18 Azmat, Personally, I could care less about how deeply you hold your religious views, just as I do about Jews, Christians, Hindus, Bhuddists, and on and on. You all have a Bible or Koran or some other book of enlightenment or guidance, and you are welcome to immerse yourselves in it to your heart's desire, but you don't have the right to tell anyone who doesn't agree with you what they are allowed or not allowed to do. No matter how powerful you think your Allah is, even if he does exist, he cannot grant you the right to control the world. As far as the hate speech bit, hate speech is actually protected by the First Ammendment, it is hate crime that is punishable by the courts, and for some reason, I don't see publishing a cartoon as a crime.

Posted by: Another Jeff at February 05, 2006 07:51 AM (kC+lo)

19 Azmat and honeyy: Please go watch Monty Python's Life of Brian, and then come back and have this conversation with me. Or follow some of the links I provide for Jesus in this post: http://littlemissattila.mu.nu/archives/155753.php

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 05, 2006 09:57 AM (XbEp3)

20 I love "Life of Brian", and remember it was about a fictional character and more about the attitude at that time. Also Jeff, John Lennon said, Imagine no possesions and I do not see you giving up your car or house or computer. I think Lennon meant to say imagine if we didn't see our differences of religion and only our humanity. By the way, I do not hold one single book as sacred, I hold, all books as sacred, they all have something to teach us. Perhaps what I have learnt is respect for differring points of views. And respect for Hindus or Sikhs or Christians or Jews or budhists, and do not believe in offending any one and mocking them for their beliefs. And Anita Honneeyy, Can we talk? Do you believe in upsetting people for no reason? I think not. You seem like a reasonable person so lets educate people, enlighten them that our differences are only superficial deep down we all believe the same thing, All I am asking for is just a little RESPECT. Find out what it means to me!

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 05, 2006 05:23 PM (GtDum)

21 Life of Brian was a parody of the gospel stories in the New Testament. It is a (very funny) take-off on the life of Christ. It ends, for crying out loud, with Brian (Jesus) on a cross, flanked by two criminals--and surrounded by many more--whistling. This is a caricature of the crucifix you see in every Catholic church, and the cross that is Christianity's driving symbol. It simply doesn't get more direct than that. I don't believe in mocking people for their faith. But Muslims need to get their own house in order. On one side you have cartoons that make a valid point, and on the other side you have people setting embassies on fire. Which makes you look worse, as a Muslim? The cartoons, or the people commiting crimes against people and property? Moderate Muslims have my respect for their faith and their reasonableness. And they will have my admiration when they successfully stand up to the extremists who claim their religious beliefs. By the way, one of the difficulties in putting the list of parodies together--the one near the top of my page--is that most of the funniest jokes about Christians and Jews are made by Christians and Jews.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 05, 2006 07:30 PM (XbEp3)

22 Azmat, You seem like too intelligent a person to believe your own conspiracy theories. The newspapers that printed the cartoons have printed even more disrepectful cartoons featuring President Bush. Left, Centrist, and Right are all various shades of Socialism/Communism in Europe, and they wouldn't do a single thing Bush asked. And we all know by now that the cartoons in question were first printed in October and the Muslim response was well planned and organized. Kind of explains all the Danish flags and pre-printed standardized signs. So, why this protest now? A show of power while the world is deciding what to do about Iran, perhaps? Providing an a-priori "rationale" for some planned terrorist attack in the works? As you are a mathematician, a chess player, a new(relatively) father, and a reasonable man it is up to you, and moderate Muslims like you, to condemn the violence without reservation. Stop making excuses. People reading blogs like this one have read enough of the Qur'an to know what is said. And what is being done. We know the rationalization that certain things were appropriate in past times, but not now. Every Muslim that renounces violence must step forward and condemn what is happening. And turn in those that plan violence. And stop contributing money to groups that plan and execute terrorist acts. And stop making excuses for them. Or we will consider you accessories before and after the fact. There are no spectators in this war. We are not going to live under Sharia here in the US or in Europe. You said at first that we in the West don't have emotions or passions for anything. What a mistake it would be to believe that! You should have been around me or people I know when the videos of Palestinians(and other Arabs) celebrating the collapse of the WTC were aired, or the breakup of the Shuttle Columbia...

Posted by: Darrell at February 05, 2006 08:21 PM (r5Heh)

23 Here we go again, I tried to post a response and got this error message: "Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content: Please correct the error in the form below then press Post to Post your coment. There must be a limit of words that are allowed, so I will try to be brief again.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 05, 2006 10:00 PM (GtDum)

24 Thank you Darrell, I do denounce all violence, including war, and as I have said before that the murderers and suicide bombers do not belong to Islam. In the eyes of God and Islam these people are going to .. As for those who are protesting or apologizing for Islam, those poor misguided souls have no power. I make no apologies for the actions of idiots and criminals. All I am asking is that some people set aside their prejudice, and not lump everything on a religion based on the actions of a few.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 05, 2006 10:12 PM (GtDum)

25 I think many people here in the West do not understand this religion. It is based on personal interpretation and there is no hierarchy or established church or leader. I do not listen to some mullah who is going to tell me how to practice my religion. Nor is there anyone who can speak on behalf of Islam. Because whatever he will say, 1%-99% of Muslims will disagree with that So when people say that the leaders of Islam should denounce violence? Well those self-appointed leaders might have other interests. There is no one in the world that speaks for Muslims.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 05, 2006 10:15 PM (GtDum)

26 Regarding the cosp: you are right on I don't want to believe it, about (and WD's) Or about (Abu Gh..) Or the torture scandal, The government does not do that. It must be some misguided individuals and they will be punished. Now if I find out (through NY times maybe) that the publisher of some Danish newspaper was PAID by someone, I would just laugh "Marcellus: Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 05, 2006 10:22 PM (GtDum)

27 Alright, no names - only issues. First, the cartoons were stupid and silly. But that's OK, they weren't meant to be works of art. So, WHAT were they meant to be, if not provoke and insult and 'manufacture' an issue? Especially the one with Mohammed with bomb-turban? Freedom is great, but not when it ends up with some hapless people, who probably have nothing to with it, end up getting killed over the issue in Afghanistan or some such place (check out the news today). Freedom of expression does not mean I can trash everything that is dear to you in public, for the fun of it. But... The Muslims of the world haven't exactly proved tolerant about all this either. I understand this can be an emotional issue (unfortunately we all have these abstract notions we value dearly). But to go out and burn buildings, scream death and get in to a frenzy shows that Muslims, especially in the middle east, have not understood that not everything needs to be seen as black and white. The frenzy, the mob mentality, the absolute lack of discussion and discourse reflects very poorly on these people and countries.

Posted by: malli at February 06, 2006 03:22 AM (fn8c/)

28 Here is my cogent analogy: If you make a cartoon that implies that the holocaust was a good thing. And that those jews deserved to die, then have twelve people come up with different ideas and have those cartoons plastered all over the newspapers in Europe. I would think that the whole world including Jews Muslims and christians would be outraged. I challenge you Attila (I got my glasses on this time) To post a cartoon like that and see how long it takes before you get a death threat or your web site is shut down. That is the same way Muslims feel about these cartoons.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 06, 2006 08:15 AM (pV9dZ)

29 Azmat, It's been done. All over the Arab media, everyday, all over the Muslim lands. You don't see Jews burning embassies, kidnapping people, inciting violence, terrorism, screaming for beheadings. Hmmm... When comparing, it's hard not too judge who has the better qualities. At least qualities we admire here in the west, like restraint! I always hear that radical, unreasonable Muslims are the minority. But the throngs of Muslim people rioting in response to a CARTOON don't seem like a few.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 06, 2006 08:50 AM (mI5lW)

30 you gotta link for a cartoon or you are just saying that yolanda? and compared to one billion, your throngs are a minority wouldn't you say? or can you quantify a throng into a percentage?

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 06, 2006 09:32 AM (GtDum)

31 http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/cartoon_arab_press_081302.asp http://www.memri.org/antisemitism.html Oh and BTW, when you go to the memri site, http://www.memri.org/ browse their video collection, specially interesting is the 28 episodes of an Iranian Soap opera showing the lives of Jewish Rabbies and how they go about abducting children and draining their blood to make their bread. Also the interview with a child praised as a good muslim because she say Americans are devils and jews are monkeys... and... well, you get my drift... there are so many, ever day, it's impossible to go through them all. Good thing I don't believe all muslims are slanderous.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 06, 2006 10:07 AM (mI5lW)

32 Peace is the respect for the rights of others. Benito Juarez (1806-1872)

Posted by: Benito Juarez at February 06, 2006 11:40 AM (iuxH1)

33 Okay, Azmat: I've posted a cartoon that puts down Jews and Americans: http://littlemissattila.mu.nu/archives/155973.php I'm waiting for my death threats from hook-nosed sons of Abraham and illiterate American hillbilly Christians with bad teeth. They should arrive any minute. And the cartoons in question wouldn't be plastered all over the newspapers if people who claim to share your faith weren't rioting over them. Furthermore, Christians have no authorities here on earth: there are so many different denominations, from Roman Catholic to the various Eastern Orthodox churches, and many many different strains of Protestantism. Christianity is just as chaotic as Islam. Yet very few Christians threaten to kill others for insulting their faith. And it's been that way for centuries. I'll say it one more time: mainstream muslims have some work to do. You must shout down those who make you look bad. The cure for bad uses of freedom of speech is to counter it with good uses of freedom of speech.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 06, 2006 12:33 PM (XbEp3)

34 Hey Yolanda and Attila, thanks for the attempt, but perhaps I am failing to communicate my request. These Cartoons do not reflect the outrage that muslims feel. I think They would be similar to if you made fun of Arafat, or Khomeni, and really nobody cares about that. The real insults to either Christianity and judism (other than calling them monkeys or dogs) are hardly present in these cartoons. Clearly, you have no analogous cartoons, or perhaps you are too scared of the jewish defense league to post such material on your website. Or perhaps no one in the world has created such cartoons. Ever! Now if you were to go out and hire some great cartoonists, who really had it in for the Jews. You may be able to accomplish that. Don't look at the Arab world, They believe in the same prophets, so really they can't insult either Moses or Jesus. Did you notice that was kind of absent in your cartoons. And no mention of the virgin Mary.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 06, 2006 08:05 PM (GtDum)

35 Azmat, did you look at my links in the post I referenced above? Did you see all the offensive depictions of Jesus on the cross? You keep moving the goal posts: the first link Yolanda gave you was one that equated the Holocaust with Israeli actions, and there were others that did exactly the same thing--which is what you were asking for before! The virgin Mary is a less dramatic example, since she is only revered among Catholics; Protestants respect her, but don't accord her the same place. How about this case?-- http://renewal.va.com.au/artcrime/pages/c_ofili.html Or this?-- http://www.almalopez.net/ORnews/010326asf.html The Danish cartoons were extremely mild compared to the caricatures of Jesus that are out there, and the extreme trashing of Jews and Roman Catholics that are very easy to find. You just don't want to see it.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 06, 2006 09:25 PM (XbEp3)

36 Our Lady of Floral Bikini's and Bare-Titted Angels Finally of course there is that cinematic classic, "The Last Temptation of Mohammad", wherein the Prophet yearns to leave his task of writing the Koran behind, to run away with his camel driver and bugger sheep and goats 'til the end of his days in peace. You remember that one, right? No? Of course not. It was actually "The Last Temptation of Christ", wherein the Savior yearns to come down off the cross, leave his work of paying the price for the sins of mankind behind, and run away with Mary Magdalene, to have hot wild monkey sex with her to the end of his days. Yeah. Totally cool dude. No offense found there...

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 06, 2006 10:08 PM (xdX36)

37 Er...I forgot to note, that no Hollywood executives lost their head over that one. Nor were any studios burned to the ground that I recall, nor surging riots in the streets, screaming, chanting "Death to Hollywood!!! Death to Martin Scorsese!!! Now granted, we DID want to string him up by his thumbs, but that's another matter...

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 06, 2006 10:11 PM (xdX36)

38 As I recall, a few people marched around with signs in front of theatres when it opened, and then everyone went home. No violence whatsoever.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 06, 2006 10:30 PM (XbEp3)

39 So I see, Azmat, nothing will satisfy you. If we show you cartoons with vile depictions of Jesus Christ, you say it is not the same thing. You do know that Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God and God simultaneously, don't you? Jesus is God made man. Maybe you don't pay close attention to the attacks on Christianity, but I have seen cartoons depicting Jesus engaged in sodomy and pedophilia, and everything that your mind can imagine. Does that count? Does that come close to the cartoons that the Danes printed? How about movies like "The Last Temptation of Christ" that shows Jesus as a character that watches Mary Magdalene engage in sex with a line of men? And that's one of the less blashphemous scenes! We learn that Jesus is a cross-maker by trade, Judas is the real hero of the story, worshipping the flesh is worshipping God, Satan is God, God is Satan, love is lust, The Saviour needs to be saved. If those lessons were lost on anyone, we have hallucination sequences that culminate in Jesus marrying Mary Magdalene before God sends an angel to kill her. Then marrying another Mary, the sister of his friend Lazarus, then cheating on her with her sister Martha and impregnating them both. For laughs, we have Peter, the Rock on which His Church will be built, spitting out the Body and Blood during the Transubstantiation at the Last Supper...But how can anyone take offense at any of this? Hollywood/Scorsese based the movie on the book of the same name , written by an avowed Marxist/Leninist, ex-communicated Greek Orthodox writer Nikos Kazantzakis, so we would expect a faithful and sensitive portrayal of Christ, wouldn't we? And this is only a single example. Christians would be lucky if Jesus was only shown wearing a bomb in his hat! But we protest with words, say "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do," then move on from there... I suggest you do likewise. I started this comment before Desert Cat was filled with the Spirit(I just looked)...I hope it's still relevant!

Posted by: Darrell at February 06, 2006 10:31 PM (rVCt+)

40 One more: the Jesus and Virgin Mary dildoes-- http://www.eros-london.com/articles/2005-04-26/divineint0426/ Any violence erupt over those? I thought not.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 06, 2006 10:55 PM (XbEp3)

41 Azmat, if a disclaimer is needed - I am neither a Muslim, nor a Christian, nor a Jew. I have seen some of these cartoons posted above that 'blaspheme' Christ and others. Look, you must face the fact that Muslims have very little tolerance for criticism and do not encorage plurality of opinion. This is not (atleast for me) a discussion about religion per se. Its about whether, in a world where people think and live differently from you, you accept that truth or not. Muslims have a right to protest and demonstrate if they feel offended or wronged - but NOT with death threats, fatwas, burning, stoning, and all those midieval histrionics. I think all of us will be better off if we approach our gods and prophets with less dogma and more latitude.

Posted by: malli at February 07, 2006 01:47 AM (fn8c/)

42 Islam is a peaceful religion that is what the true muslim says.At the same time some followers feel that it is the only religion and others are fake.This is the problem. Swami vivekananda the sage from India tells us the story of the frog in the well. In a well lives a frog and it thinks that the well is the biggest and is arrogant about the fact that it is in the biggest well,One day a frog from the ocean comes into the well and the well frog asks the ocean frog whether the ocean is half the size of the well and the ocean frog laughs at the well frog as the ocean frog knows that the well frog has not seen the ocean and will never understand the truth, The hindu frog sits in the hindu well and thinks its well is the biggest and so does the muslim frog and the christian frog. The ocean frog is the real frog which has understood that all religions lead to one god .So it is imperative we respect and love other religions and not try to harm others, Hinduism does not believe in conversion and respects all other religions and so does buddhism .The malady today is fight in the name of god and that needs to be condemned especially if it is done in the name of god whatever be the religion.Violence cannot be preached and if any religion does that than that is not the true religion

Posted by: sund at February 07, 2006 02:33 AM (yEUgB)

43 the middle east/asian people just want to colonise the rest of the muslims.in any case, the thing to ask is whether an arab man , is equal to a prophet, or where in the quran is suicide bombing allowed, there is none off-course, i am a muslim , i know. how about beheading, if prophet abraham was directed to slaughter a sheep, why should man, with a long dress and beards , in iraq or whereever , do it in the name of islam. the message is just clear,people have abandoned the religion in pursuit of supremacy on earth.

Posted by: Andy at February 07, 2006 08:21 AM (ZOTUz)

44 Thank you Sund. That is the best proverb I’ve heard. I’m keeping that one! But it makes me think. Is it really an issue of respect for religions vs. freedom of the press? Or is it extreme prejudice? I’ve heard it said twice now, from an Mullah in Pakistan, and recently from an Iman in Gaza, “The life of one Muslim is worth that of all the infidels” granted these are just two people (community leaders speaking to thousands of followers) But it makes me think that it isn’t the lack of sensitivity of the Danish press that enrages them, but a more presumptuous “How dare they!” Muslims are boycotting the Danes, but forget that the Danes open their arms to Muslim immigrants, pursued to divest from Israel in solidarity with Palestinians, even took away the broadcasting license of a Copenhagen radio station for disgracefully inciting violence towards Muslims! Did Muslims thank them for doing this? No! Why not? Could it be Muslims expect reverence? But if infidels show disrespect, it’s off with their heads! No matter what good they did before? Could it be that the Muslim frog in his well thinks he’s in the ocean? Why does Mr. Azmat not bother to look at the links we give him disproving his point? Sorry, Azmat, but you specifically asked for cartoons referencing the holocaust, I gave you that and more, now you change the criteria, but Desert cat, Atilla girl and Darrel caught the ball there! (Now I realize that you were alluding to the Iranian’s 12 Holocaust Cartoons Competition, which I call “forced diet”, only 12 cartoons instead of the hundreds they usually publish… lol! Here is a link to very intelligent progressive thinking Muslims that Azmat should read: http://www.muslimwakeup.com/

Posted by: Yolanda at February 07, 2006 08:58 AM (mI5lW)

45 Hey All, Thanks for all the links, in my spare time I will study them all. At present I am busy studying for a midterm. What I had hoped to accomplish was to see if you could move away from prejudice and bigotory. But I see that some of you wish to hang on to that one for a while yet. I am not much of a practising muslim, so those cartoons do not anything to me. All I was trying to do is bring to light the reaction of some of the Afghans, and Syrians and Iraqis. Perhaps I have failed to shed any light on that. And on top of that I have exposed some ignorance and prejudice. Please go out and make some muslim friends and learn about different cultures. We are not all that bad as portayed in the media. Notice that the protests are going crazy in areas of the world where there is no law and order. Like I said before all this will be over in a couple of years when the US withdraws from Iraq and Afghanistan. I wish you all the best.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 07, 2006 01:43 PM (GtDum)

46 But we never argued that people were having emotional reactions to the Danish cartoons. We were arguing as to whether those reactions were reasonable, and whether they were out of proportion to the supposed insult, and whether other religions have to put up with the same sorts of insults—which I believe we've demonstrated that they do. I have no prejudice against Muslims. I only wish the moderate Muslims would place more pressure on the bomb-wielding ones to stop killing innocent people. I do not believe that makes me ignorant.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 07, 2006 05:02 PM (XbEp3)

47 When the Israelis are criticized for mistreating the Palestinians they yell anti-Semitism! When the Muslims are criticized for violently reacting to Â… ahemÂ…a cartoonÂ… they call us ignorant bigots! Azmat did indeed expose some ignorance, just not ours. Bottom line, those cartoons didn't disgrace Muslims, their reaction did.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 07, 2006 05:38 PM (mI5lW)

48 We? How many are you? Attila? How do you propose I put prresure on people who live in AFGHANISTAN Under the rule of USA? Or Iraq? Or Syria? heck I don't even know any muslims where I live. And I don't think you are ignorant, you seem articulate and intelligent and educated. Reasonableness is subjective and culturally defined. At one point in history it was thought perfectly reasonable to exterminate masses of human beings because they belonged to a certain race or religion. It was perfectly reasonable in this country that blacks sit at the back. Or speak only when spoken to. I am sure other religions have to put up with insults and If I knew in advance how people would behave, And I did the provocative thing anyways, then the blame does not go on the reaction, it goes to the one provoking the reaction. Cheers, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 07, 2006 05:46 PM (GtDum)

49 I challenge you Attila (I got my glasses on this time) To post a cartoon like that and see how long it takes before you get a death threat or your web site is shut down. That is the same way Muslims feel about these cartoons. You posted a challenge. We rose to the challenge, showing that these kind of anti-Christian and/or anti Jewish slams are commonplace. Now we're ignorant and prejudiced for meeting your challenge? I think it's clear that we're seeing a set of ever-moving goal posts, just so Azmat can walk away from this thread with his pride intact.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 07, 2006 06:03 PM (xdX36)

50 The Muslim world would like nothing better then to have its religion the WORLD RELIGION, but it will never happen.... You have only promoted that your religion is a violent one and no one will support a violent religion...any god that tells its people to kill another human being is not the god of creation but the god of the underworld...SATAN himself... The true God of this world is the one that created all things human, animal, plant and insect life....gave color and variety for humans to have pleasure enjoying... The Muslim world of Iraq was at one point in time the CRADDLE OF CIVILIZATION that was when God was in it...but since SATAN took hold of its people the once fertile and beautiful land has turned into nothing but dust, dirt and ignorance...The clock was turned back in time to ignorance in its highest form.. It is funny though, Abraham gave seed to two sons, Issac and Ishmael....Ishmael was the bastard son and ever since Ishmael at the age of 12 was casted out of Abraham's house he became the father of the Arab Nations and they have been at war ever since....So in essence two brothers have been fighting for centuries...How sad, but in the end the bastard son will lose for all eternity...

Posted by: Betty at February 07, 2006 07:39 PM (Ffvoi)

51 Azmat, Just speak reason whenever you have the opportunity to do so. That's all we ask. I have had close associations with Muslims, through work, since the late 70's. When attending the wedding of a Pakistani friend at work in 1981, I was told by an elderly Kurdish guest(who was treated reverentially by the others)that I was the second coming of Saladin. I just took it as something to do with my name, but the other guests seemed to take it seriously. I left in a little while because it got a little intense. The point is that it's easy to support free speech when it's somthing you agree with. I've learned to support the free speech that I disagree with because I have seen that it's an absolutely necessity for any nation to remain free. If you disagree with something, by all means voice your opposition--peacefully. And with all peaceful means at your disposal. And don't offer excuses and rationalizations for those that choose violence. We all understand, but don't condone violence except in genuine self-defence. You have a daughter who will grow up in the land of opportunities that will be whatever she chooses to be someday, only limited by her efforts. She will be protected by our laws, customs and traditions. What greater Blessing can a man hope for? Help secure those Blessings for other daughters(and sons)of Islam in their own lands. It's time to move forward...

Posted by: Darrell at February 07, 2006 09:11 PM (J1dvz)

52 After reading Betty's comment, I take back what I said about Azmat exposing ignorance..."not ours". That's assuming, of course, that Betty is one of "ours". Sorry Azmat.

Posted by: yolanda at February 08, 2006 08:58 AM (mI5lW)

53 Hello All, Well I can't really reply to all of you since my freedom of expression is limited on this board. So here it goes I'll be precise: Mr. Cat you said "Seriously. I have a hard time not completely rejecting everything else out of hand, when I see something so outlandish. " then why are you bothering to respond? I was ignoring you for that reason and when I read one of your responses it said Mohammed this and Mohammed that, So I didn't bother to read it. But since you insist on talking about this issue, here is what I see. I went back and looked at your cartoons and realized that you were only asking to substitute the name mohammed. Well In that case I apologize for calling you bigoted and prejudiced and ignorent. (But can you see that a cursory glance at your post looks like you have no respect towards a religious figure) What I see now is the pain and anger you feel about those cartoons that mock Jesus. Not only that you have no recourse. Also people of your own religion and culture are doing that? huh ? That must be even more infuriating. So I sense your anger and your sadness. But here is what I say, why do you not do something about it. This anger is now directed towards me. When it should be directed towards those posters. I think you are also angry at christians for being complacent, resigned and impotent. For putting up with these insults. I suggets you take some action, nothing like burning down an embassy and getting shot, just write to the person and ask them to remove those offensive cartoons. Then you will not be angry at anyone. Secondly, all the examples that you choose are not from any major newspaper, nor were the commisioned by someone for the exact purpose of inciting violence. So I say your examples are not relevant. I know that you think in your mind that they must be relevant, but that is the problem with cross cultural communication. You see in Islam, it does not have to be a cartoon, it could have just been a picture of Mohammed and people would have the same reaction. Adding the terrorist part only adds insult to injury.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 08, 2006 10:31 AM (GtDum)

54 Dear Yolanda, My best friend is Jewish, and we have a great time playing chess together and discussing philosophy. I looked at your list of cartoons, very interesting. It looks like any insult and anti-semetic remark is tabulated and kept for the record. Now if I came accross insulting remarks about my religion, culture or race I would throw them out. But to keep a record like that indicates payback. Files and Files of them about from people all over the world and for the last 5,000 years (hyperbole). You see Yolanda Jews opperate differently, it was evident in Hitlers time, and even now. When they can get their way without direct confrontation, it usually is the way to go. It was in the Warsaw ghetto I believe that Jews started to realize that they have to stand up and fight. I am very happy that the nation of Isreal is a testamont to that spirit. Your cartoons fail on two counts, they may offend Jewish tradition and culture, but they were not commisioned for the exact purpose of inciting violence. Also most of them have a political and cultural commponent not a religious component. Now I make fun of my friend regarding his Jewish heritage. (He is shall we say a little frugal) but he himself knows that, he is just like that, its only funny if there is an element of truth in it. And I think most Jews have a sense of humour about life. Heck if you have been through the holocaust, a little cartoon is not going to bother you. So Islam and Judism has these two different histories. Please take that into account, and show me what really upsets you and bothers you personally. Now about that Iranian thing, they must be reading this Post cause they got the idea from me. No seriously, that reaction directed towards Isreal and the Jewish community shows the ignorance of the Iranis. It also shows how backward some of these countries are, 7 people dead in Afghanistan. But hey this will pass, some muslims will protest some will die, they will get it out of their system, you know Salman Rushdie is still alive, despite all the threats against him by Khomenie. Regarding the reaction of muslims all over the world, I would say this, this was a calculated plan of the people who published the cartoon. You can do the same thing next year or the year after and get the same reaction. So I say that people who provoked the reaction are somewhat responsible for it. I usually am very good at managing my reactions, (My chess ability). But unfortunately, 90% of the muslim world is uneducated and live in poverty. Those poor Afghans don't even know where Denmark is.. By the way some of the best Chess players and Champions in the World are Jews. I don't know if you have read up on the controversy over Alexander Alekhine and his remarks about Jews. And some people call Bobby Fisher Anti-semitic as well. Total lies, chess players are by in large thinking people, and they know the meaning of Respect. I can have a little child playing against me, but if I do not respect my opponent, I will go down fast. I hope that I have not offended you in any way. And that ignorant and bigoted comment was not for you. It was my misunderstanding regarding another post. Cheers, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 08, 2006 11:04 AM (GtDum)

55 Hello Darrell, Holy Batman, did I hit the Anne Coulter research staff? Just kidding. I know you have done your research and found out that I am a teacher. You may have seen the picture of my daughter plastered somehere on the internet. You see I am foolish enough to use my real name. Partly, because in the arena of ideas I am reasonable. If I say something or write something inappropriate you can call me on it. (i am sure google has my phone number as well) So I am a real person, resposible for what I say. Now in this setting I could choose to be annonymous and then Iwould have a license to be irresponsible. Precisely why I choose to post my real name. Because what I say becomes impactfull if it is authentic. So regarding free speach: if it means that someone knowing that a certain reaction will take place if they say something and write something and that reaction may cost lives and upset people. Then those people go ahead and do that anyways. I am not for such free speach. I would rather have my daughter grow up under repressive Islamic Laws or Ignorant Afghan tribes, then to have her know this freedom, where you have the freedom to intentionaly harm and hurt others. By the way, if you think that your laws are protecting my daughter, you have no idea of the experince of most muslims or people of different races. in this country someone can take me to jail tomorrow and I would not have access to a lawyer or be able to call my family. I will say that you have been the most reasonable person on this board, and I appeal now to your ability to reason. Should I raise my daughter in an environment, that discriminates against her just because her last name is Hussain? And without knowing anything about her lumps her with a bunch of third world lunatics? And makes her responsible for their actions?? Cheers, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 08, 2006 11:35 AM (GtDum)

56 Yes, I did a bit of research on you to see what sort of person I was dealing with, to decide whether or not it was worth the time and effort to respond to the issues/concerns you brought up. I thought it was worth the effort, but now I'm having second thoughts. If you truly believe your comparison is valid, that your daughter will enjoy more freedoms, greater safety, and have the opportunity for a better life in Syria, Iran, Pakistan, et al, I suggest you start making travel arrangements now. You say, " I would rather have my daughter grow up under repressive Islamic Laws or Ignorant Afghan tribes, then to have her know this freedom, where you have the freedom to intentionaly harm and hurt others" Intentionally harm others? With f'ing cartoons? Are you crazy? How about "honor rapes and honor killings" in the societies you hold up as "shining" examples? You could be arrested, tried, and executed before you complete an upgrade to Windows Media Player 10 on dialup throughout most of the Arab world! I will glladly take my chances being an American with the name Hussain, than living throughout any part of the Arab world with any name other than Hussain, or an Arab/Muslim variant. The children of the Muslims I know have grown up to be doctors, lawyers, and respected members of the business/professional community. Or bums living off their parents labors, partying 24/7... But they had a choice. And I guess, so do you. If you really believe what you say, your choice is clear! I will pray for your daughter.

Posted by: Darrell at February 08, 2006 12:50 PM (Sc5TM)

57 Dear Azmat, First. Yes, Azmat, Memri keeps files and files about any comments against the WEST, not just jews. In an effort to prove that many Arab governments (that control their countries’ media) that call themselves our allies, actually use America (and Israel) as a blanket excuse for their internal troubles. Why does Saudi Arabia, one of the richest governments in the world not have adequate social services for its population? Because of America! No wonder so many of their people donate to the Pakistani Madrasas (terrorist schools). No wonder 15 of the 19, Sept 11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. MEMRI was created to show why. I much prefer their format than mindless inflammatory comments in newspapers that may stir up problems for our American Muslims. However if you look closely you will also find they keep track of the enlightened Muslims columnists that write articles extolling temperance. Second. I can’t completely fault you not knowing this, but many of those insults towards Jews ARE of a religious nature. It is called “the Blood Libel” Originally created by the Spanish during the inquisition of 1491, stating (falsely of course) that it is a Jewish religious custom to kidnap a non-jewish child and use his/her blood to make the Passover Matzoh. Many Jews were killed because of this libel and was the reason for the Jewish diaspora out of the iberic peninsula where they had once lived in peace under the muslim Moors. Ask your Jewish friend. The Blood libel has long since been abandoned by those that want to hurt Jews, except in Muslim media where it is constantly brought up in cartoons, soap operas, literature, newspapers, etc. This is a religious attack, for which I have never heard an apology nor have I ever seen a riot in protest. In that respect you are right, Jews tend to exhaust all means of protest before resorting to violence, sometimes to their peril. I’m glad you agree with me on this. I’m sorry for your daughter. I’m hispanic and I often get confused with Semites, my male hispanic friends get targeted at airports, etc. However having the last name of Hussein in the US must be a burden hard to bear.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 08, 2006 12:55 PM (mI5lW)

58 What I see now is the pain and anger you feel about those cartoons that mock Jesus. Not only that you have no recourse. Also people of your own religion and culture are doing that? huh ? That must be even more infuriating. So I sense your anger and your sadness. But here is what I say, why do you not do something about it. This anger is now directed towards me. When it should be directed towards those posters. I think you are also angry at christians for being complacent, resigned and impotent. For putting up with these insults. I suggets you take some action, nothing like burning down an embassy and getting shot, just write to the person and ask them to remove those offensive cartoons. Then you will not be angry at anyone. But you see, you are missing my point entirely. In this western liberal democracy I understand that the right that the cartoonist exercises to blaspheme my Savior is the same right that I enjoy to worship Him freely myself. I don't have to like what the cartoonist depicts, and the cartoonist doesn't have to like my faith, so long as we each permit the other their own perspective without fear of persecution. Surely as a non-extremist Muslim you can see the beauty of that? This is why I have little sympathy for the rioters and other easily provoked and offended sorts.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 08, 2006 08:27 PM (xdX36)

59 Mr. Cat you said "Seriously. I have a hard time not completely rejecting everything else out of hand, when I see something so outlandish. " then why are you bothering to respond? Just because something is made to be inordinately difficult does not mean the effort is not still possibly worthwhile.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 08, 2006 08:33 PM (xdX36)

60 Azmat: 1) Are you a citizen? Then you have certain specific rights under our Constitution. You cannot be locked up without due process. This applies to people of all races and ethnic backgrounds: we are all equal in the eyes of the law. 2) The freedom of speech might be perceived as 'the freedom to hurt people," but it is not. The cartoons about Jesus are offensive, but we who have the Western mindset recognize them as a necessary evil. We have a saying: I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." And: "the cure for bad speech is good speech." 3) When you say that the Danish newspaper was inciting people to violence, you are justifying an immoral reaction (violence) by blaming it on the newspaper, which was only trying to make the point that journalists censor themselves about Islam like they do about no other religion. 4) Yolanda, I'm going to have to disagree with you: I have a huge number of Syrian relatives in this country. They are first-, second-, and third-generation immigrants, and they love it here. They are successful and prosperous. My tailor is Lebanese. The woman who runs my local beauty supply store is Iraqi. They are warm, sweet, happy people, haunted by what happens in their own countries. Azmat: Right before the U.S. invaded Iraq, I asked my friend if she had any relatives in the big cities. "My uncle lives in Baghdad," she told me. "But what can you do? This must be done, whether I lose a family member or not." She sees that Iraq is better off as a democracy, and far better off without Saddam. Most Arabs and Iranians in this country are happy. They like it here. When they encounter prejudice, they shrug it off, like my half-sister does when she hears the word "diaper-head." She rolls her eyes, and gets on with her life.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 08, 2006 08:43 PM (F7zrJ)

61 Betty: 1) You may not put down the entire religion of Islam in a blanket fashion like that. Not here. I expect nonviolent and/or moderate muslims to be treated with respect on this website. Islamofascists are a different matter: because they are murderers--or at least condone murder--we can make fun of them all we want. 2) Likewise, do not put Arabs down on this website. Inattention to (1) or (2) can result in your commenting privileges being suspended.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 08, 2006 08:55 PM (F7zrJ)

62 I think Azmat's post and Desert Cat's response above illustrate perfectly the disconnect between their two cultures. Neither can understand the other's point of view, even when they are sincerely trying. Sometimes, I think the best we can do is acknowledge our own biases based on culture, religion, etc, and not insist on imposing these views on others. In other words, live and let live. The words to John Lennon's song Imagine seem more appropriate than ever before: Imagine there's no heaven, It's easy if you try, No hell below us, Above us only sky, Imagine all the people living for today... Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do, Nothing to kill or die for, No religion too, Imagine all the people living life in peace... You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one, I hope some day you'll join us, And the world will live as one. Imagine no possesions, I wonder if you can, No need for greed or hunger, A brotherhood of man, Imagine all the people Sharing all the world... You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one, I hope some day you'll join us, And the world will live as one.

Posted by: Chuck at February 08, 2006 09:55 PM (XEXDN)

63 Regarding the reaction of muslims all over the world, I would say this, this was a calculated plan of the people who published the cartoon. You can do the same thing next year or the year after and get the same reaction. So I say that people who provoked the reaction are somewhat responsible for it. Just as the wife of a violent man is responsible for the beatings she receives? See, that doesn't fly. Because that places the responsibility for "peace" and "tolerance" on the wrong party. When one has to walk on the proverbial egshells to avoid "provoking a reaction", that is a classic symptom of dysfunction in a relationship. Rather the correct approach is for the person with the violent and volatile personality to be made to realize that he has an anger problem that he needs to address. Frankly I see the same dynamic here, and I see the solution as not to tiptoe around the explosive hotheads, but rather, every time they feel "provoked" to hold up a big mirror so they can see how the rest of the world sees them. If the image isn't pretty, perhaps in time they may change. And if not, we have the firepower and (God willing) the willpower to defend our freedom of expression to the death.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 08, 2006 10:02 PM (xdX36)

64 Sometimes, I think the best we can do is acknowledge our own biases based on culture, religion, etc, and not insist on imposing these views on others. Chuck, isn't that what I'm saying here? I don't have to like what the cartoonist depicts, and the cartoonist doesn't have to like my faith, so long as we each permit the other their own perspective without fear of persecution. Sheesh... And if you want to live in Strawberry Fields, more power to you. But you do know those lyrics are pretty explicitly proselytizing, don't you? Ironic, huh? I don't care to join you in that particular vision myself, as I think it's a weed and 'shrooms* induced fantasy. The closest we're likely to ever come to the world "living as one" ('til Kingdom come anyway) is for us all to agree to live and let live, whatever our approach to life. *(not that there's much wrong with those, per se)

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 08, 2006 10:20 PM (xdX36)

65 Another perspective on the controversy from some apparently more level-headed Muslims: FreeMuslims.org

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 08, 2006 10:32 PM (xdX36)

66 Desert Cat, The distinction is subtle, but believing in free speech doesn't necessarily mean acknowledging your own cultural bias. One may think freedom of speech should be self-evident to everyone. What do you do when you come across someone like Azmat, who sees freedom of speech as potentially harmful? I believe in virtually no restrictions to free speech, but I acknowledge that I'm a product of my culture. Regarding John Lennon's song Imagine, sure he's proselytizing. Isn't that what we're all doing on this blog? Again, there's a subtle distinction between proselytizing and "imposing" (my word) one's beliefs. I think the latter word implies the possible use of force. Also, I don't buy into Lennon's vision literally; I just "imagine" what it would be like. I think his most important point is that religions and countries are the things people tend to "kill and die for." Personally, I'd trade less religion for more peace.

Posted by: Chuck at February 08, 2006 11:41 PM (XEXDN)

67 Desert Cat, I went back and read my original post and realized it might have seemed that I was admonishing you for "imposing" your views on Azmat. That wasn't my intent. I actually noticed how Azmat misunderstood your original point about cartoons depicting Jesus, and then I suspected that I may have misunderstood his point about the cartoons depicting Mohammed. As he said, "you have no idea." Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, you can't make the other side understand. What do you do then? That is my question.

Posted by: Chuck at February 08, 2006 11:58 PM (XEXDN)

68 Dear Azmat, Whoa! I just read your post where you say; “I would rather have my daughter grow up under repressive Islamic Laws or Ignorant Afghan tribes, then to have her know this freedom, where you have the freedom to intentionally harm and hurt others”, My reply: As Darrell said, “Intentionally harm others? With f'ing cartoons?” !!!!! Check out: http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm http://www.stoning-themovie.com/ I’ll take cartoons over STONES any day! Your double standards are mind-boggling. Do you think the single Jew living in Syria doesn’t feel harmed when he hears thousands chant “Death to all Jews” Or the single westerner in Somalia when he hears “Death to Americans”. Or the raped girl in Iran when she hears chants of “Stone her!” If chants like these were heard here in the west, the chanters would be arrested. Radio D.J.’s in Egypt routinely call for the death of all Jews, death to Israel, when a Copenhagen D.J calls for death to Muslims, his radio station looses it’s broadcasting License! Insult, lampoon, satirize, but don’t call for physical harm, violence or death to anyone. Those are the rules of freedom of speech. Why do you think that correcting the violent behavior of your fellow Muslims, and improving their image around the western world, is LESS important than punishing some foolish Danes (who were responding to that negative image)? Lets see if you can or will answer this.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 08:03 AM (mI5lW)

69 Dear Attila girl, You misunderstand me. IÂ’m happy here too, third generation, true blue American! Being singled out at an airport is a minor annoyance. IÂ’d gladly live through worse to live in the US. And regardless, of whatever Azmat says, he believes this too, otherwise he wouldnÂ’t be here. I think, that given the choice any Muslim woman would rather live here than in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc, where women have to suffer honor killings, Stoning, Burkas, Clitorectomies, arranged marriages, and in essence a life devoid of much of the freedoms we take for granted.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 08:09 AM (mI5lW)

70 Hello Darrell, Thanks for your prayers, towards my daughter. She is growing up fast and is a joy to have. You are right in some ways, the west has the opportunities. But there are things here that are of concern. One of the highest crime rates in the world. Access to drugs, Bush is cutting education funding, while the rest of the world is increasing it, like you say freedom has a price. That is what I am weighing as a parent. See my daughter was born here so she is a citizen, me I am an outsider, and as it stands have no rights under the law. My daughter can grow up in India, Pakistan, Canada, UK. She has the choice available to go anywhere. I get to choose what is the best atmosphere for her self esteem and growth. I don't want her to feel like a second class citizen in her own country of birth. So perhaps I will expose her to both the east and the west. Maybe an education from the east will teach her some values that someday she can come back to the States and change the system here. Change this misguided notion of free speach that some of you have. Clearly Mr. Cat is the best example, he misdirects his anger, and if you read his post you can see that in the tone of his writings. And its the same for Yolanda. They both are giving me examples of how upset they are about something, and yet complacent, perhaps resigned. Because of their own misguided views on free-speach. They cannot think outside the box. Critical thinking requires that we examine our own assumptions. And perhaps listen to other ideas. I am perfectly open to be convinced of the merits of free speach, but what I am hearing is that free speach means that you proudly display INSULTS to great men like Jesus or Mohammed. That is just plain common sense to me,that this is nothing to be proud of. You should acknowledge that this is a downfall of free speach and that we need to examine our fundamental belief system. Yolanda, I don't know where you get your information, but as often as a black man gets dragged behind a truck, or a gay boy is severely beaten or a latino is denied his or her constitutional rights, that is not how often honor killings are done. There are no stats I agree, but you have not lived in those parts of the world and just don't know. You are shall we say ill-informed on that subject. Also there is this idea of ethno-centricism, thinking that your culture is right and the best. Now I have had the privilage of growing up in both cultures, (I grew up in Canada) Was born in UK. And spent time in Pakistan. You don't know if there is much wrong with arranged marriages now do you. That is just abhorrent to you on principle. But the fact is that the divorce rate correct me if I am wrong is 54% here. And In Pakistan say 3%. So much for arranged marriages. I don't know where they practice clitorectomis in the world today, but hey I am circumcised, and I don't feel any pain today. And it is a cultural and religious thing. Yolanda, what freedoms do you have list em!!! And examine them critically, Is it realy true. Or is it just some hogwash that you have swallowed, and haven't even thought about. You don't even have the freedom to think your own thoughts. If God forbid the FOX channel goes off the air, Americans would not know how to respond to any new idea presented to them. That is how brainwashed this country has become. You do not have the critical thinking skills to examine what is wrong with free speach, and that goes for ALL of you, except Darrell who sees that freedom means a compromise and he is willing to make it. Shamefully and regretfully, see I believe that we can have the best of both worlds. You don't have to compromise on free speach if you have simple standards of etiquette, say what you want, don't be disrespectful.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 10:07 AM (GtDum)

71 What do you do when you come across someone like Azmat, who sees freedom of speech as potentially harmful? I frankly don't believe that there are whole people groups to whom the idea of freedom, including freedom of expression is inherently anathema. What I see when I come across something like this is a person who is supporting a particular power structure. Either by reason of his position of privilege in the power structure or simply by reason of his cultural conditioning, he believes freedom to speak one's mind is harmful. It may, in fact, be harmful to the power structure, and the individual may believe that harm to the power structure equates to harm to himself. But aside from such cultural conditioning, I have a hard time believing that any person is born without an inherent yearning for his own freedom. Is that a failure to acknowledge my own cultural biases? I don't know. There is an endless parade of personal stories of people of diverse cultures who came to this country, drawn in large part by the freedoms we enjoy. If the yearning for freedom is not a fundamental and cross-cultural phenomenon (at least on the personal level), then what would make America any different from any other country as far as drawing immigrants is concerned? You never see people clamoring to get into more repressive regimes. You always see them clamoring to get out. Why is that? What drove people to risk life and limb to climb the Berlin Wall or cross the Iron Curtain during the Soviet decades? What drives the hundreds of thousands who cross the southern border of this country, or the dozens who risk a hazardous sea crossing from Cuba, or risk suffocation in a cargo container to slip into this country from China? Freedom. Opportunity. It's what drew the original Europeans to this continent, and it's the same thing that continues to draw people from every country of the world here. Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, you can't make the other side understand. What do you do then? That is my question. Depends upon the specific person "on the other side" in question. Some people I need to avoid and walk away from. Some people are worth engaging just to learn more of the mindset. Some people are worth a continuing dialogue, in hopes of finding a breakthrough in understanding.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 10:28 AM (B2X7i)

72 Chuck, Like, wow, man... Except for one little thing. Have you ever considered that religion stopped billion of people from being killed over the millenia? Notice how the body count in wars has risen since the ideas of Marx and secular humanism have taken hold? The death toll of Twentieth Century , including WWII combined with the extracurricular activities of Stalin and Mao may be range of 200-300 million. And it's not just the technology. Wars have always been about the acquisition of secular power, hardly a concern of God. Or those concerned with the concerns of God. What about at the personal level? Do you think that religious beliefs ever stopped one person from killing another? Or taking their own life? You might "imagine" a Utopia without religion, but I see a Hell dimension of never-ending horrors.

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 10:32 AM (3LOjg)

73 Or is it just some hogwash that you have swallowed, and haven't even thought about. You don't even have the freedom to think your own thoughts. If God forbid the FOX channel goes off the air, Americans would not know how to respond to any new idea presented to them. That is how brainwashed this country has become. You do not have the critical thinking skills to examine what is wrong with free speach, and that goes for ALL of you Clearly Mr. Hussain is the best example, he misdirects his anger, and if you read his post you can see that in the tone of his writings. He is giving us examples of how upset he is about something, and yet complacent, perhaps resigned. Because of his own misguided views on free-speach, he cannot think outside the box. Critical thinking requires that we examine our own assumptions. And perhaps listen to other ideas.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 10:40 AM (B2X7i)

74 Dear Azmat And yet, you donÂ’t answer my question! Why do you think that correcting the violent behavior of your fellow Muslims, and improving their image around the western world, is LESS important than punishing some foolish Danes? How can you even consider a valid measure of matrimonial harmony the divorce rates of countries where if a woman were to seek a divorce she would loose any rights to her children? Or consider a valid measure of social harmony the crime statistics from a country that punishes rape victims? The crimes you speak of here in America, are CRIMES! They are illegal. “You do not have the critical thinking skills…” I see that you are resorting to personal insults now. A clear sign youÂ’ve run out of rational arguments. You want me to list what freedoms I have? Check out the American Constitution! http://www.explorefreedomusa.org/learn/index.html With all its amendments to adjust it to modern socio/economic situationÂ… vastly different from Sharī'ah law. And FYI, I still DO have the right to choose what happens within my body and NO, I DONÂ’T WATCH FOX NEWS!

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 11:38 AM (mI5lW)

75 Attila, You say: The cartoons about Jesus are offensive, but we who have the Western mindset recognize them as a necessary evil. We have a saying: I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." A necessary evil? I think not! Whoever said that I will defend your right to say it, must have lived in the seventeenth century. This is 2006. What a silly thing to say, and a whole nation bought it and is running with it. Not for a second examining the merits or the pitfalls. If something is offensive to you what do you do about it? Nothing? Knowing that it is wrong? Huh? If you have any children will you teach them to say offensive things to others to excercise and prove their right of free speach. In any school setting when someone instigates a mischief, that child gets a time out. Look at who instigated this whole affair. You are more focused on free speach when you should be looking at why someone would want to insult someone else to begin with. Its about upbringing; look at your own, were you taught to create unneccesary upset with others. Or were you taught to be respectful of other children. Please don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting in any way that the over-reaction of the muslim community is justified. I am saying that this was already known. And you can try it again and again. Its like pavlov's dog, stimulus-response, its been done before many times with the same reaction. Now you ask me to enlighten the muslim community on this issue. I think I might find more reasonable people like you who would be willing to examine the notion of free speach, it would be far easier. Then trying to reach one billion muslims, with whom I have much less in common, language culture etc. Besides the responsibility to take the higher moral ground lies with the enlightened person, we can't expect the same from barbaric and illiterate people. I appeal to your higher sensibilities on this issue.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 11:49 AM (GtDum)

76 Hey Yolanda, 1) Nothing personal, I am asking you to use your critical thinking skills. Tell me what rights you have, don't link. Which ones do you excersise? 2) I don't have the power to correct the behaviour of muslims around the world. Nor can I change the image of Islam. It is what it is. Just like those are crimes in the US, honor killings are crimes. By the way you do not have to watch the FOX news to become brainwashed, the ideas have become so mainstream that you just have to be outside the Box to recognize them. And pretty soon you will not have a choice as to what happens to your body. And Mr. Cat : The women who puts up with beatings is somewhat responsible. She should do something about it No? Oh by the way, I am not upset, and if so about what? Have a nice fair and balanced day Cheers, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 12:06 PM (GtDum)

77 Azmat, Even hypothetically granting your (as of yet unsupported assertion) that the cartoons were some part of a grand conspiracy, efforts to "incite violence" will nearly always fail, if the persons toward which the efforts are directed are sober, rational and self-controlled. Who is really in control of the situation then? When one group is able to hold the expression of another group hostage based on the threat of violence, then there is no real tolerance or respect involved. Just fear. That's the bottom line. Funny though. You claim that we in the west have no real passions about anything. And yet when I express some passion for freedom of expression, I become some kind of right-wing bigoted nutcase in your mind. Ironic.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 12:16 PM (B2X7i)

78 Oh by the way, I am not upset, and if so about what? Really? Based on that bit I quoted and some of your earlier statements, if you're not upset personally, you're certainly parroting some of the lines from what we on the right fondly refer to as the "frothing moonbat left". You do appear to be as much a product of western leftist thinking as you do Islam. As such, you betray some of the hallmarks of those who suffer from what we sometimes refer to as "Bush Derangement Syndrome", or BDS. In that light, your accusations against Yolanda and myself are quite ironic, and not a little bit humorous.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 12:25 PM (B2X7i)

79 Azmat, I have good news for you! Education spending has never been higher in the US. And most Americans know that education funding is primarily at the State, County, and Local levels unlike other parts of the world where it is solely the responsibility of the national government. Tricky stuff, facts! And you might want to consider, as a mathematician, that cutting projected increases(wish list numbers culled from someone's nether regions) in a budget is not the same as cutting spending, since the actual increases in spending are exceeding inflation. If I were you, I would worry about those countries where the "students' sit around all day memorizing and reciting verses and composing odes to suicide bombers. And looking at world maps where the word "Israel" is nowhere to be found. See, my God, Azmat(and as a monotheist I mean your God, too)can handle himself. He doesn't need our help. Insults reflect on those making them, not our God. And why should I care what a paper in Timbuktu is saying. Or what cartoons it is printing. It is not my place to impose my will on other people. Nor should Arabs be imposing their will on the people of other sovereign lands. When I see a cartoon or hear an idea I don't agree with, I speak out. And the process of thinking, reasoning, and speaking out keeps ideas fresh and actually renews my faith and beliefs, and makes them stronger. I prefer Fox News to the "new world order" group-think of the Left. That's why you see real ideas being debated at right wing websites rather than a endless parade of the same repetitive slurs and invectives directed at President Bush and our government. Fox News and conservative sources don't lead conservative opinion and issue "marching orders"--they simply report what is being said by millions of conservatives in the US. And they tell you what the Left is saying, too. That's why university studies (two so far)HAVE shown Fox to the least biased of the major networks. The rest of the MSM are waiting for the DNC and the NYT for their opinions on the matter. America is for those who believe in the dream of a place like no other on this Earth, at any time. The rest can enjoy their stay, however short. We believe this, we really do. I'm sorry you don't share the dream.

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 12:35 PM (lXCP7)

80 I am not suggesting in any way that the over-reaction of the muslim community is justified. I am saying that this was already known. And you can try it again and again. Its like pavlov's dog, stimulus-response, its been done before many times with the same reaction. Now you ask me to enlighten the muslim community on this issue. I think I might find more reasonable people like you who would be willing to examine the notion of free speach, it would be far easier. Let me clarify what I meant by "Who's really in control then?" I'm actually a bit disappointed in your apparently low opinion of your fellow Muslims, and your sense of hopelessness in reaching them. When I ask, "who's really in control", I am expressing the hope that with the removal of the political power structures that tend to inhibit free inquiry and free expression, that these people that you so easily give up on as pavlovian automatons, can join the rest of humanity as sober, rational, and self-controlled individuals. And if anyone can reach them on an individual level, it would be someone like yourself who has a foot in both worlds.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 12:45 PM (B2X7i)

81 I know that I am about to lose my privilages for posting this: But hey Attila, your post to Betty says Betty: 1) You may not put down the entire religion of Islam in a blanket fashion like that. Not here. I expect nonviolent and/or moderate muslims to be treated with respect on this website. Islamofascists are a different matter: because they are murderers--or at least condone murder--we can make fun of them all we want. 2) Likewise, do not put Arabs down on this website. Inattention to (1) or (2) can result in your commenting privileges being suspended. Hilarious, what happened to your free speach argument, I will defend your right to say it even if it offends????? Also Yolanda: same goes to you, now that you have been personally offended by my comments will you still defend my right to offend you??? And Mr. Cat seems like I have offended you, nothing personal? Do I still have the right to do that? Please all accept my appology, in advance. I Hope that you all see that you are not interested in free speach, only when whats being said is to your liking.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 01:02 PM (GtDum)

82 And Mr. Cat seems like I have offended you, nothing personal? Do I still have the right to do that? Please all accept my apology, in advance. I Hope that you all see that you are not interested in free speach, only when whats being said is to your liking. That would be a peculiar conclusion to come to. There is no real conflict between the rules laid down to facilitate rational conversation in a specific forum/weblog, etc. and the freedoms enjoyed by society in general. You see, anyone can start their own weblog and establish their own ground rules. Just because I wouldn't permit you to smoke in my living room does not mean I am in favor of banning smoking, for example. You can attempt to offend me all day long if you wish, so long as you permit me to respond, or to walk away if I choose not to. I am not one who is easily offended. If anything, I'm frustrated at your apparent preference for creating diversions rather than responding more directly to some of the points people are trying to make.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 01:28 PM (B2X7i)

83 Azmat, Not a single person here has threatened you with physical violence. Hey, I think that's the point! Yolanda, Desert Cat and I have been more than willing to debate our points peacefully with you, and no one has lost their head. Why can't we expect the same from the rest of the world? We know it's in you. This is LMA's home and she sets the rules. We are all guests. Guests showing up at all hours of the day and night without calling first. I respect her right to limit what is said in her home. And make us take off our shoes and put on goofy looking little fuzzy slippers to protect her white carpets. It's her right. She doesn't want any guest feeling uncomfortable, does she? By what they read. But notice she does it all non-violently, with a few simple keystrokes and a maniacal laugh... Her Credo says "Attack ideas, not people" so you are forewarned. I don't always live up to her ideals, but I try. And free speech somehow survives.

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 01:42 PM (f5ALQ)

84 Perhaps she is being a bit overly protective of you then, Azmat?

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 01:44 PM (B2X7i)

85 Dear Azmat “Tell me what rights you have, don't link. Which ones do you excersise?” All the ones I exercize? Or only the ones I think I couldn’t exercise in a Muslim (not secular) country? “I don't have the power to correct the behaviour of muslims around the world. Neither does any democratically elected western government have the power to tell cartoonist what they can and cannot draw. As you have seen here, freedom of speech is such a passionately held right, by both liberals and conservatives (maybe the only thing they agree on) that it is held higher than the sanctity of our religious icons! And no foreign country will dictate how we use this freedom. Maybe someone will try to make an amendment to our laws to enforce respect of Mohammed, but if the majority of the people of this country don’t agree, it won’t pass. “Nor can I change the image of Islam” Yes, you can! Like it or not, you are representing Islam on this blog. Your rational arguments and restraint help put a different face on Islam besides that of the radicals that feature so prominently in the media. You could encourage other muslims to restrain themselves. If the majority of muslims did this, we wouldn't have problems with terrorism. “pretty soon you will not have a choice as to what happens to your body. Touché! “…will you still defend my right to offend you???” Yes, I will, and I’m sure, Desert, Darrel, Chuck and Attilla girl would too. (Not Betty though, she will seek you out, throw holy water on you, and expect it to sizzle) You can offend me all you want, and the most you will get in return is an offensive word back , the loss of my respect, or the loss of my attention.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 02:08 PM (mI5lW)

86 A thicker skin can come in handy in a world of diverse opinion. And one develops a thicker skin by being regularly exposed to said diversity of opinion. Where one is raised in an environment of homogeneity of thought, one is more easily led to be outraged at differing opinions, even on such things as important as one's reverence for religious figures. Developing the ability to shrug off offensive opinions, remarks, etc. is not a sign of complacency or resignation. It is, in fact, a vital tool to living peacefully in this world.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 02:21 PM (B2X7i)

87 Desert, That is the most cogent explanation I've heard yet! Thanks.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 02:58 PM (mI5lW)

88 Here is a lucid discussion of the concepts of religious tolerance as espoused by John Locke: Claremont Institute -- Toleration is a two way street Worth reading and very topical.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 09, 2006 05:44 PM (xdX36)

89 But can we hit 100 comments? We'll have to hit LMA's "tip jar" to pay for the bandwidth we've taken... I think Azmat has been playing "devil's advocate" with us,(no offense intended!)trying to show us that anyone can reach their boiling point. It won't work. Most of us have been battle-tested on those Leftist websites. Besides, some battles are fought with words. Or with cartoons. An appropriate measured response is said to be a key tenet of Islam. As it is under the Judeo/Christian traditions. Maybe there has to be one central governing body in the Muslim religious world. One that can cast out those who violate its core principles and Beliefs, and proclaim them not to be Muslims. That way, the world would know that Muslims are serious about being perceived as the "religion of peace." It's not good enough to just say "this act is not sanctioned by the Qur'an," then go about your business as if nothing has happened. We are all our brothers keepers. Let the world know these people are no longer a part of your religion. Just as Catholics(and others do)when their members stray away from Church teaching and Law.

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 07:39 PM (/oT5h)

90 Yolanda will always have a choice as to what happens with her body. She controls what goes into her body. And what words leave her mouth. Like "no," for example. Whatever happens, States will be free to decide. And Congress can take it up for the first time on a national level. Just like in the UK. P.S. Yolanda, no insult ever intended! :-) You can use me as a like example in the future!(Just wait, with my luck, it's going to be on the subject of forced castration...)

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 07:49 PM (/oT5h)

91 Azmat, First of all, thanks for hanging in there and continuing the dialogue. Your opinions are in the minority here, yet you didn't take the easy way out and tell us to all screw off. A well-known philospher once said "The unexamined life is not worth living." For much of my adult life, I've questioned my own beliefs. Do I believe as I do because of the way my parents, church, culture, etc. conditioned me? Of course. Is it possible to step outside that conditioning and think independently? With lots of hard work, it is. This is beyond free speech; it is free thought. I would argue that you are exhibiting about as much free thought as anyone else here as evidenced by some of the right-wing versus left-wing comments on this blog. My political positions were black and white too, until I majored in Political Science :-). I think it is important to get beyond just tolerating opposing viewpoints. I aspire to understand the rationale behind opposing viewpoints even when I don't agree. To that end, I want you to know that I think I understand some of your points regarding free speech and the cartoons. Allowing freedom of speech is a trade-off. There are definitely some negatives. I think you are arguing for some rules of etiquette to govern speech. On the face of it, that's reasonable. That's certainly what's expected in our schools, in polite company, and even on blogs like this one. The problem that free speech advocates have with legislating such etiquette is that governments will tend to outlaw speech which is critical of the party in power in order to hold onto that power. We believe that democracy cannot exist in such an environment. Therefore, we take the good with the bad to insure that we are not subjected to government tyranny. This idea is a fundamental building block of American democracy. That said, I want to acknowledge that our democracy doesn't work perfectly, as you have pointed out. We have relatively high crime rates, a high divorce rate, and we can be a bit self-righteous as a nation. On the other hand, we also have a university system that is the envy of the world, our scientific and technological achievements are unparalled, and we have the world's largest economy. It is often said that people immigrate here because they love our freedom, while those who oppose us hate it. I think many people also move here because they love the strength of our economy, while many on the outside percieve that our strength makes us bullies. People tend to pull for the underdog against the bully, and this is hurting our image in the world even with our allies. I'm reading "The World is Flat", which is about the globalization of the world economy that occurred from building excess Internet capacity. While the U.S. public was distracted by 9/11, India and China quietly moved into technology markets once dominated by the U.S. I work in the IT field and have witnessed this directly. U.S. dominance of the global economy may begin to shift in the coming years. That's a bit scary if you live here, but the positive aspect of this is that economic interdependence often trumps ideological differences. The relatively friendly relationship between China and the U.S. is one such example.

Posted by: chuck at February 09, 2006 08:52 PM (XEXDN)

92 Hmmmm... For some reason I can't post what I want to say (and it was all nice stuff) I get a "Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content" message. Are there some key words that can't be used on this blog? I should find Atilla's rules.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 09, 2006 09:14 PM (mI5lW)

93 Darrell, Nothing personal, but I love you! And not in a gay way, (not that there is anything wrong with that.) Let me start with the cuts that Bush is proposing just in Education: EDUCATION Educational technology state grants, $272 million Even Start, $99 million High school programs terminations: Vocational education state grants, $1,182 million Vocational education national programs, $9 million Upward Bound, $311 million GEAR UP, $303 million Talent search, $145 million Tech prep state grants, $105 million Smaller learning communities, $94 million Safe and Drug-Free Schools state grants, $347 million Elementary and secondary education program terminations: Parental information and resource centers, $40 million Arts in education, $35 million Elementary and secondary school counseling, $35 million Alcohol abuse reduction, $32 million Civic education, $29 million National Writing Project, $22 million Star Schools, $15 million School leadership,$15 million Ready to Teach, $11 million Javits gifted and talented education, $10 million Exchanges with Historic Whaling and Trading Partners, $9 million Comprehensive school reform, $8 million Dropout prevention program, $5 million Mental Health integration in schools, $5 million Women's Educational Equity, $3 million Academies for American History and Civics, $2 million Close-Up fellowships, $1 million Foundations for Learning, $1 million Excellence in Economic Education, $1 million Higher Education Programs: Education demos for students with disabilities, $7 million Underground Railroad Program, $2 million State grants for incarcerated youth offenders, $23 million Postsecondary Student Financial Assistance Programs: Perkins Loan cancellations, $65 million Leveraging educational assistance programs, $65 million Byrd Scholarships, $41 million Thurgood Marshall Legal Educational opportunity, $3 million B.J. Stupak Olympic scholarships, $1 million _Vocational rehabilitation programs: Supported employment, $30 million Projects with industry, $20 million Recreational programs, $3 million Migrant and seasonal farmworkers,$2 million Teacher Quality Enhancement, $60 million Total $3,468 million Ok I am totally against cut and paste but here I had to save myself the typing. The reason why I love you is because you are honest, and authentic. These other clowns that come here with their phoney pseudonyms are all hypocrites. At least you see the limitations of free speach and accept it any ways. You admit to watching FOX. ME TOO!!! I only have two kinds of channels in my house, FOX news or Indian channels. Now let me aks you this, Do you dislike muslims? Or Islam? On the Continuum of Love, Like, Indifference, dislike, hate. Would you say that you would tilt slightly towards the hate/dislike/could do without side? Well if that is the case at least you would be honest enough to acknowledge your bias. Most people here who are bashing muslims and Islam, are doing so under the guise of; Oh who me I think we should treat all people equally with respect. The pretense of civilized behaviour is a little too much. Look in this country go visit your jails and see who lives there. Go visit your slums and see who lives there. Check out who is working the minimum wage jobs, and what is the wage disparity between blacks, latinos and whites. Then come and tell me how the Bush education plan is working. You talk about physical violence? huh Look at how many lives are being destroyed by drugs and alcohol. Precisely what this administration plans to cut. And a big thank you to the veterns. Yes buddy you and your big free speach ideals are behind this. Because people who expose this scam are shut up. Just like you all are jumping all over me, because of your little tilt against Islam. Let's just suppose I ask you what you think about Hawaiians, on the same continuum. You would more than likely be indifferent. being that those polyneasian descendents although brown are still considered americans. Now let us suppose the Hawaiians are revolting ( I know they are ugly to look at but that is not what I mean). I mean they want their freedom from USA. All of a sudden their rights to free speach will become, treason, correct me if i am wrong? That any coup will be violently suppressed by the United states military. You want to talk about violence? Your country has attacked two seperate countries in the last five years, costing thousands of lives. And went into afghanistan and kidnapped people who were trying to defend their own country. And now holds them captive for an unknown period of time. Hey but you know what At least they have freedom of speach now. Like I said before two more years and this lunacy will be over. The dream is not dead for me Darrell, I am the one trying to revive it, you are carrying the dead body and pretending its alive. You know someday I will go back to the old country and tell them of the America I have seen. From glory (2000 and before) to its downfall(with the rise of the right) and explain to my people that if you start believing in something blindly and uncritically, well that has already been the reason for their downfall..

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 09:22 PM (GtDum)

94 Yolanda, I feel your pain. I too got the "Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content" message when I tried to use the word S-o-c-r-a-t-e-s. I had to substitute "a well-known philosopher" to get it accepted.

Posted by: Chuck at February 09, 2006 09:45 PM (XEXDN)

95 Sorry, everyone. Two possible explanations; take your pick: 1) Sometimes the other bloggers in my blogging collective use the MT blacklist to outlaw ordinary words. Then the tech-savvy people have to go in and fix the problem. (Those of us who aren't really tech-savvy--just fakers-are encouraged to stay the heck out, lest we accidentally make the problem worse.) 2) I'm easily offended, and I insist that the rest of the world conform to my arbitrary standards of behavior. Otherwise, I will edit their comments, or possibly blow them sky-high. Is there a difference?--because I can't really see one.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 09, 2006 10:31 PM (F7zrJ)

96 Azmat, 1) It's very difficult for me to take someone seriously when he argues that there's little/no difference between removal of the female clitoris vs. male circumcision. As I'm sure you're aware, the analogous mutilation would be chopping the penis off. 2) Most of the programs you've cited as having been cut strike me as either a) intrinsically worthless, or b) performing an inappropriate task for a Federal agency to undertake. 3) None of us has said that rudeness is a good thing. It's just that tolerating rudeness--vs. killing people over it--has the advantage of being nonviolent. Learning to shrug it off is helpful for one's blood pressure. And you know that, too. Deep down.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 09, 2006 10:37 PM (F7zrJ)

97 The thing is, I am not going to research every item you put on your list of education cuts. I don't have the time or the motivation. Rather, I will say that it has been my experience that if your list is from a Leftist source, like the NEA, it is bound to be less than honest. I will find that a lot of these programs have been supplanted by another equally-or-more costly program. Part of an overall consolidation program or effort. Or more money is being given by the federal gov't to the States, County, and local governments to cover these programs. Or the programs have simply outlived their usefullness. The NEA can't even be honest about President Bush allowing Sen. Kennedy to write the "No Child Left Behind " Bill... I just have to take a look at my property tax bill to see the answer. Yep. Education...up 17%. Now if we can only look for those studies showing no correlation between education spending(above a certain level)and student performance and lifetime achievement. I have Arab friends, as I said. In recent years, I have become troubled with Islam. That came after studying the Qur'an, by the way. I also felt duped because I read a Saudi-produced version of the Qur'an that was intended for Westerners in the 1980's(given to me by people at work)and I found out that it had been intensely edited--removing all controversial passages, including all violent directives, all references to Jews. I have a problem with violent directives being given to ordinary followers of Islam. In the Judeo/Christian Bibles, we have violent stories, too. King Nimrod did so-and-so to this person or that. But we are never told to do what King Nimrod did. Decisions, such as those, are left to higher authorties. Or secular authorities. Not our own hands. We also don't have directives and imperatives for world domination. And there is that further safeguard that I mentioned before about the centralized authority in Catholicism especially. The interpretation of the Scripture isn't left to each individual worshiper, or cleric. I see a troubling Leftist slant to a lot of what you say. I find that curious knowing what I know about Lefists and their opinions regarding religion. And God. You have a very strange bedfellow indeed, if you are following the Leftist path. The US was attacked on 9/11. Maybe you heard something about that? Countries harboring, funding, arming, and protecting terrorists became fair game. They were warned. They chose to ignore the warning. And issue fatwas and calls for jihad. Some might see that as a declaration of war, and it is a war that they got. You probably won't take my advice, Azmat, but I am encouraging you not to bet on another losing horse--the Left. Nothing good will come of it. It's all a Ponzi scheme. If you killed everyone in the world that could be considered "rich" and divided up the money equally among all the remaining people on Earth, it would come to some $30,000, according to the last calculations I saw. And even those numbers are exaggerated because that assumes their is someone left with money to actually "purchase" the goods and properties and non-liquid possessions. In one fell swoop. Sales like those usually wind up being pennies on the dollar. It a fool's exercise. It has been since the first Socialist saw a man building a nice dwelling. And killed him for it. Sure, Azmat, everyone wants something for nothing. I was talking with a Hawaiian who belonged to a group looking for reparations. Turned out there were only three native Hawaiians in the large group. The others were Polynesians with no link to Hawaii other than coming there in the 70's and 80's. If groups or individuals become violent, they will be dealt with by civil authorities. That is our law. The same will happen to anyone that commits violence against you--or me. Anyone reading this Blog knows that Condoleezza Rice will be the next president of the United States. President Condoleezza Rice--has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? I think I might move to Iran and tell them what is wrong with their country. And how to fix it. Think I will get a warm reception?

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 10:40 PM (UZ5yi)

98 Now, Azmat,let's see if your principles of fairness stand the test of reality. Are you the champion of the common man--or woman? Then pony up! How about hitting that Paypal button and contribute something toward the bandwidth we've used on LMA's site. I'll be doing it. You wouldn't want me to be the only fair person here, would you? From each according to his ability...

Posted by: Darrell at February 09, 2006 10:48 PM (UZ5yi)

99 Hey Yolanda, We have the same blood. Mine by the way is B positive. Your democratically elected govt, controls many parts of the world, has the power to do regime change in Iraq, and Afghanistan, remove governments, overthrow leaders and at times commit murder. Your democratically elected government, has sold and bought drugs, assasinated people, sucked the blood out of your brothers and sisters, went to war on false pretexts (I am not talking about Bush) has attacked and invaded 49 countries, and that is only since 1947. And this is by its own admissions, lets not forget the false propaganda in Iraq and Other Arab countries. Hey if it can do all that whats a few bucks to be thrown at a Dane. That is why it is the best country in the world to live in. That is why all the latinos from South America are lined up at the border, yelling Hey I wanna be exploited in the US, where I will work for minimum wage, or even less.the minimum wage is not even $2 where they come from. I hope I am not offending you yet. Cause I haven't even started! The best part is once they are here, they start spouting the same B.S that the rest of the masses spout. Like dead fish in water they are swept by the current. The live ones are usually thrown in jail, cause they exercise their rights of free speach in front of a racist cop. Check it out, what is the fastest rising prison population? I am so flatered that you think that I am representing Islam. I think in one of my posts I said noone speaks for Islam. But thanks for the kind remark. Also thanks for saying my rational arguments (although most here would disagree with that, they think I am playing some lawyer) but you are wrong about the restraint. I am agressively attacking free speach. And If I say so myself, making some strong points. Most of which have been lost in the miilions of posts. Also I am alone, and trying to have four or five convcerstaions at the same time. Very funny, a world power like US has not been able to control terrorism and you think I could impact that! Once again you flatter me. Blush Yolanda, you are my sister I would never offend you. I am on your side. But sometimes my little sister makes mistakes. I let her learn from her own mistakes, cause I had to do the same. My job is to be there when you realize your mistake and support you in every way. Right now I want you to know that whatever you think is right! If you think that muslims are the scum of the earth you are not too far off. If you believe that muslim women have limited rights, there is some truth to that. If you think that you have more freedoms and rights here than anywhere else I am with you. Let me know when you wake up from your dogmatic slumber. I will be there!

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 09, 2006 11:23 PM (GtDum)

100 Hello Mr. Cat, to be quite honest I did not want to respond to you at all. You see I am really scared of YOU. In all your posts, and I have a sixth sense about these things by now, there is a violent man waiting and lurking about in the shadows. Please either come out of the closet and acknowledge that you have strong feelings about certain subjects so that we all know where you truely stand. Now what i am about to say may upset you so I am already apologizing in advance and letting you know that it is only for discussion purposes. Nothing personal OK. Now that we got that straight, let me first say, "You don't Like Muslims do YOU?" Like you can't think of them as your brothers and sisters can you? You don't like Islam and what it preaches? Am I correct in assuming that? You also do not like homosexuals, blacks, chinease or latinos. You think that these people have a place like washing dishes and stuff but they should stay in their own homes and not try to become your friend or come home at your house for dinner. Am I correct in assuming all that. If not then try to imagine such a person. (Like Sean Hanity) You got the picture now. Ok Now this muslim guy walks up to you and informs you in a mocking manner that he has just raped and sodomized your wife. Let me see if this persons (you) response is going to be. 1. Oh this is America, tell me did she enjoy it. 2. I respect your right to free speach. 3. You swing at the guy you give him a right hook and a left upper cut and people around you are restraining you and you are yelling at the top of your lungs, "I am going to kill the M'fuker" Sounds to me that scenario three wins the game. And no court in the US is going to convict you. Not twelve reasonable men who believe in free speach huh? What does all that prove probably nothing to you. Because you can't see it. You would respond "Developing the ability to shrug off offensive opinions, remarks, etc. is not a sign of complacency or resignation. It is, in fact, a vital tool to living peacefully in this world." and I would say Get real. If you seriously believe that this persons reactions could be controlled, then you must believe that we can talk reason with a Lion. You think I can go back and make any sense to muslims, Heck I don't even make any sense to you and I speak your language. And as far as the left is concerned I have never voted in US nor do I intend to. I would never join a Loser party like the dems, they have really failed the people of this country. Mr cat, I don't think of you as a right wing bigoted nutcase, why would you say that? I don't understand BDS? Mr Cat the reason why I am afraid of you is because of coments like this "I understand that the right that the cartoonist exercises to blaspheme my Savior is the same right that I enjoy to worship Him freely myself." That is some scary shit. My brain goes into cognitive dissonance when I read that! Now having said that I invite you to make friends with other cultures, learn about the way japs treat each other with respect. Learn about how the chinease treat their elders. Or how in India, the have no homes for the elderly. Find out what it means to Sikhs or Muslims that they would rather have their daughters dead then be displayed in a magazine naked. I ask you what you would do if your sisters picture or your grand mothers picture was taken by coercion and placed on public display? Would you not fight that? Let me just ask you this when is violence justified according to you? If Sadam says he has no WMD's that is not sufficient, we have to call him a liar and all the UN inspectors liars and Bomb the hell out of a country. Let me guess so we can give them free speach. Yes violence is justufied like torture is justified if we pick up an innocent man who we think is a terrorist and give it to him. Then he speaks freely. Or when we imprison Iraqis and they cannot fight back. That is a good time to do violence in your opinion am I correct? That is when we champion the cause of free speach. Are you getting the picture clearly Mr. cat? You see I suspect you have the picture clearly, you just want to keep it fuzzy. Cheers, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 10, 2006 12:52 AM (GtDum)

101 Mr. Chuck, thanks for the help! Love, Az

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 10, 2006 12:53 AM (GtDum)

102 Just in case anyone was under the illusion that there's no debate about freedom of expression in this country: http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=dc0039f2-1726-4bf7-8645-e9c1d0f90d9a&f=00

Posted by: chuck at February 10, 2006 05:40 AM (XEXDN)

103 Thanks Desert that’s a good article. I tried to cut and paste a portion of it, and comment on it (in a positive way) but I keep on gettin censored. Cest la vie. this is a private blog. BTW Omar Bakri Muhammad was expelled from Great Britain and is now in Lebanon, because the Brits said he was “not conducive to the public good”

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 08:59 AM (mI5lW)

104 Darell, you are right! This is a country of discourse, where every minutia is discussed, hollered, slung in the mud, and the next day we all get up and happily go to work with each other. WeÂ’ve all been battle tested (me, in blogs not unlike this one). I may sayÂ… that if I saw T. DeLay with car trouble, I wouldnÂ’t pull over to helpÂ… but the truth is, I would! if only to get a chance to hash some things out with him, IÂ’d even loan him my phone to call AAA. But thatÂ’s us, here in the US where we weren't raised in an "environment of homogeneity of thought."

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 09:02 AM (mI5lW)

105 Hey Darrell, I'd love to take the bait on the "my body" issue. But weÂ’re talking about freedom of speech vs. religious sensitivity (are we still? I saw some stuff on education, etc, etc.) So if a separate topic starts up on "that" subject, IÂ’ll gladly give you my... ahem..."facist" views. ;-) Cheers!

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 09:07 AM (mI5lW)

106 Hi Chuck, I thought I was being censored due to the length of my post, that maybe IÂ’d fallen into a a certain category of poster, and suddenly had a limits put on me, but after seeing Azmat's lengthy postÂ… I guess not. I checked out that video about a Jewish doctor harvesting organs from fallen Arabs soldiers (lol)... Yikes!...I guess it proves that Hollywood isn't run by Jewish liberals! Regardless, I'd like to see it. It's not going to "inflame" me. And regarding it inflaming MuslimsÂ… "The protocols of Zion" are college text over there; this isnÂ’t going to make it any worse.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 09:34 AM (mI5lW)

107 Yolanda, No bait!!! Why would you think that?

Posted by: Darrell at February 10, 2006 09:41 AM (2zCMq)

108 Yolanda, Always save(copy) your comment before hitting the "post" button. Try hitting "preview" instead of "post". I encounter fewer problems that way. You are not being singled out by LMA, I'm pretty sure. Her network must be under attack by some idiots and THEY have taken countermeasures. We all get the messages from time-to-time---especially when we include links. Try omitting the "http" and "www"...Readers can figure it out.

Posted by: Darrell at February 10, 2006 09:49 AM (2zCMq)

109 Azmat, I hope I have earned your trust to some degree. I have several honest questions to ask you, and I promise to have an open mind when I read your response. How do you reconcile the fact that many of the points you have made here which are critical of the government would not be possible without free speech protections? Do you believe the press should be allowed to criticize the government? Is there any theocracy that allows criticism of the government? Do you think it's possible to selectively outlaw criticism of some groups while allowing criticism of others? Who would decide? Check this out: http://mediamatters.org/items/200506220006 By the way, there are some restrictions to free speech in this country. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously declared that the First Amendment would not protect a person "falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic" and formulated the "clear and present danger" test to evaluate government speech restrictions.

Posted by: chuck at February 10, 2006 10:09 AM (XEXDN)

110 Dear Azmat, You ARE showing restraint! First, you are not blowing anything up! Second, there are several blogs on the internet running this topic and SOME of the Muslims posting are so rabidly mad, every sentence is peppered with words like, kill, die, and F*@k u! So IÂ’m grateful that you show enough restrain to actually have a discussion. Yes, our government has done allot of things I do not agree with. The electoral process isnÂ’t perfect (by far). There are so many issues at local levels that affect Americans directly, that sometimes we vote for a candidate based on these issues and donÂ’t look further out, like international policies. I tend to vote on issues, not party. But there is no candidate that agrees with me on all the issues I want. Sadly, to me itÂ’s a question of priority. But we are off topic. What have the Danes done to the Muslim world? Besides the cartoon thing. Yesterday there was a huge peaceful protest in Beirut. This I agree with! The Muslim people have all the right to protest Â…peacefully. The Lebanese Government apologized to the Danes for the burning of the embassy. This is also good, because burning embassies is an act of war. Do you think these Mohammed cartoons are worth going to war with the Danes, that have been so generous to the Muslim people? I donÂ’t hate the people that belong to the Muslim faith, but I do hate the doctrines of any faith that cause women and people of other faiths to be treated so poorly. When I see Muslim women in my neighborhoods wearing full Jalabeebs (Somali burkas) in the sweltering summer heatÂ… I pity them, I want to help them, I donÂ’t hate them. This is not hypocrisy.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 10:09 AM (mI5lW)

111 Hey Darrell, Thanks for the tips. "No bait!!! Why would you think that?" Ok, ok... maybe it was me throwing out the bait.

Posted by: Yolanda at February 10, 2006 10:11 AM (mI5lW)

112 Hello Mr. Cat, to be quite honest I did not want to respond to you at all. You see I am really scared of YOU. In all your posts, and I have a sixth sense about these things by now, there is a violent man waiting and lurking about in the shadows. Please either come out of the closet and acknowledge that you have strong feelings about certain subjects so that we all know where you truely stand. Just think of me as a 500 pound cat, with claws usually sheathed, and you’ll have it about right. But what does that have to do with anything? If you’re referring to physical violence, you’re mistaken. Unless you count my willingness to defend my home and family from violent assault. Now that we got that straight, let me first say, "You don't Like Muslims do YOU?" Like you can't think of them as your brothers and sisters can you? You don't like Islam and what it preaches? Am I correct in assuming that? You also do not like homosexuals, blacks, chinease or latinos. You think that these people have a place like washing dishes and stuff but they should stay in their own homes and not try to become your friend or come home at your house for dinner. Am I correct in assuming all that. If not then try to imagine such a person. (Like Sean Hanity) You got the picture now. Very nice. You’ve done quite the job on that strawman there. Typical view that the moonbat left has of anyone right of center. And almost entirely false. Is there any point to responding to this? I will though. When I was more of a “social conservative”, I felt I had more in common with moderate muslims than I had with secular humanists and atheists. Morals and respect for God was and is important to me, and at the time I believed the state had a strong role to play in enforcing these things. That has changed over time as I have spent more time thinking about the implications of excess state power over individual lives. As to your racist stereotype, this is typical leftist tripe. I live in a heavily latino city in a heavily minority neighborhood, I work side by side with latinos and blacks, I worship side by side with latinos, blacks, and others in one of the most integrated churches in my city. One of my former tenants living in the guest house in my backyard was gay. My neighbor down the street is gay, as was my neighbor across the street before I bought his house. In short, you’re so full of shit it’s coming out your ears. But I expect that of a leftist. Ok Now this muslim guy walks up to you and informs you in a mocking manner that he has just raped and sodomized your wife. Let me see if this persons (you) response is going to be. 1. Oh this is America, tell me did she enjoy it. 2. I respect your right to free speach. 3. You swing at the guy you give him a right hook and a left upper cut and people around you are restraining you and you are yelling at the top of your lungs, "I am going to kill the M'fuker" Sounds to me that scenario three wins the game. Please clarify. Is he A) simply attempting to provoke me, or B) actually reporting a fait accompli? If A, there is nothing to be gained. I would walk away. If B it is very possible that I would kill him, even if I faced the consequences later. It would matter not what color, race, creed, or class he was. As for flying off in a rage in either case, of what use would that be? Seriously? If you seriously believe that this persons reactions could be controlled, then you must believe that we can talk reason with a Lion. I think you’re projecting here. Perhaps you cannot conceive that you have the personal resources to maintain your composure in the face of extreme provocation. That does not mean it applies to everyone however. Nor is there any virtue in uncontrolled rage. None. Whatsoever. And as far as the left is concerned I have never voted in US nor do I intend to. I would never join a Loser party like the dems, they have really failed the people of this country. I’m not suggesting that you vote for one party or the other. I’m talking about ideology, mentality, presumptions, unexamined biases, etc. Mr Cat the reason why I am afraid of you is because of coments like this "I understand that the right that the cartoonist exercises to blaspheme my Savior is the same right that I enjoy to worship Him freely myself." That is some scary shit. My brain goes into cognitive dissonance when I read that! I was afraid that might be what was happening… Now having said that I invite you to make friends with other cultures, learn about the way japs treat each other with respect. Learn about how the chinease treat their elders. Or how in India, the have no homes for the elderly. Of course you’re playing to your strawman again here. But why do you disrespect the Japanese people by referring to them as “japs”? This isn’t the first time you’ve done it. Find out what it means to Sikhs or Muslims that they would rather have their daughters dead then be displayed in a magazine naked. I ask you what you would do if your sisters picture or your grand mothers picture was taken by coercion and placed on public display? Would you not fight that? Let me just ask you this when is violence justified according to you? As for your last question I think I answered that already. When I or my family is threatened with grave injury or death, I will do everything in my power to protect them. As for the rest, in this country there are laws against what you are describing, and there are legal recourses to address the wrong. But isn’t it interesting to you that it is not the daughters themselves that wish to be dead rather than to be seen naked? Isn’t it interesting that it is other family members, typically the patriarch of the family, that are more concerned about saving face or honor, that the life and well-being of their own flesh and blood? You’re right about one thing. The notion that one’s personal pride is more important than the very life of the “lesser” members of one’s own family, I find to be very difficult to accept, and frankly abhorrent. If that makes me a bigot in some people’s mind, then so be it. I call it being civilized.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 10, 2006 11:29 AM (B2X7i)

113 Hey folks, I will respond tll through email. As darrell has pointed out this is Costing, LMA. Az

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 10, 2006 12:39 PM (GtDum)

114 I'm not interested in an e-mail exchange with you Mr. Azmat. If you have anything further to say to me, it can be said right here. Please note in advance that I reserve the right to publish any e-mail correspondence I receive in whatever venue I feel it is appropriate.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 10, 2006 12:42 PM (B2X7i)

115 I knew it. Another Leftie that's all talk when it comes to paying the tab.

Posted by: Darrell at February 10, 2006 01:52 PM (SRD6f)

116 I'm finding all the derogatory leftist comments to be a bit tired. They're polarizing, detract from intelligent dialogue, and sound like another form of bigotry. How about composing a convincing rebuttal rather than just dismissing the other person's points as leftist. Now I'll prepare to get flamed :-)

Posted by: chuck at February 10, 2006 02:08 PM (XEXDN)

117 That wasn't specifically directed at you Darrell. I know you were being humorous.

Posted by: chuck at February 10, 2006 02:10 PM (XEXDN)

118 Chuck, The topic of the thread was originally the apparent proclivity of some Muslim groups for violence, in the context of the offensive cartoons published in Denmark. Mr. Hussain has demonstrated that in addition to his views as a Muslim, he shares a great many views with the political left. If you don't mind his use of cartoonish political caricature in describing his false vision of me as a racistsexisthomophobicbigot/Sean Hannity clone (another form of bigotry, perhaps?), then I'm surprised that you would object to my dismissal of that strawman and it's origins. If the topic of this thread was the left's hatred of all things Bushite, I would not likely choose to participate at all, as I have gradually lost all patience for wading through the detrius of that topic. I'm just not interested in arguing about spending cuts or what percentage of minorities are in prison. (On that one, I'm afraid my answer would cause Mr. Hussain additional cognitive dissonance anyway--I believe the higher percentage of minorities in prison is a result of structural racism in the whole "war on drugs", and that the solution is decriminalization of soft drugs and a greater focus on harm reduction measures for the rest.) That is not to say there aren't reasonable persons on the left with whom reasonable conversation is possible. You may very well be such a person. Perhaps in another thread. I've not meant any personal offense toward you in this regard. There are left-leaning persons who regularly read here, with whom I enjoy wide ranging discussions on a variety of topics. But I studiously avoid engaging on certain topics with these particular people, including all things Bush, simply for the sake of friendship. However if someone chooses to bash me with ugly stereotypes, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that I will not respond.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 10, 2006 02:39 PM (B2X7i)

119 This isn't costing me money; I'm subsidized by Pixy Misa of A m b i e n t Irony, who's building an e-empire.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 10, 2006 03:13 PM (XRSeS)

120 It's just hard for me to explain to you all, but I am going to try. By our religion; we can not have any drawing, sculpture or picture of our religion leader. It is totally sacred. The biggest reason is; for muslims to believe in God and not to look at a pic or sculpture to pray. I lived in the US for the last 20 years and sometimes I see my friends looking at the Jesus sculpture or picture and pray to it for help. You should not be praying to any sculpture or pic. This form of idealization of a human being(does not matter if it is a profit or not) and praying to it is not in Kuran. Muslum culture is so sensetive to have any kind of representation of Hz Muhammed. It is not the making fun and creating a karikatur part that bothers most Muslims; but they dont want you to draw anything about Hz Muhammed. It has been said in our Holy Book.

Posted by: James at February 10, 2006 07:06 PM (sH/nS)

121 Desert Cat, To be honest, I probably cut Azmat a little more slack because he was the only person representing his side of the cartoon issue until James came along. Thanks for your comments James. I didn't object to the characterization of Azmat's argument as a strawman. I just find the left versus right model to be divisive and inaccurate at describing many people. Depending on the issue, I am positioned at vastly different points along that continuum. By the way, you weren't alone in referring to leftists, so I wasn't just singling you out. I believe there are reasonable people on both sides of the aisle, and it is time for them to work together on real issues that face our nation, like what to do about the budget and trade deficits for example. When the Democrats and Republicans co-sponsor a flag burning bill that was already ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court when Texas tried it, I just shake my head. That's blatant pandering in my opinion. Have you noticed that Congress has only been in session 4 days this year? Also, both sides have their fringe elements. In my opinion, that makes it all the more important for moderates to take back control of both parties and work together. By the way, I agree with your position regarding the "war on drugs" and decriminalization. I guess I'm with the Libertarians on that particular issue.

Posted by: chuck at February 10, 2006 07:25 PM (XEXDN)

122 Oh in that case I will address mr. Cat on this venue. I believe that he wishes to declare a public victory, and why should I spoil that for him. He needs to feel some sense of superiority in an issue where his remarks have shown a lack of depth and understanding. Any one else I will simply email. Thanks Oh by the way derrell, I am not a Leftie, that is a Gauche characterization of Mr. Cat just that. You can ask any amount of money I will be more than happy to contribute. As long as it goes to the right (no pun intended) cause.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 10, 2006 08:33 PM (GtDum)

123 Gee... Chuck, References to the Right and Bush started at the top of the thread. Where were your objections then? While Conservatives were cheering when the Berlin Wall finally fell and the Soviet Union was no more, the Left was positioning itself to complete its takeover of the US. They have control of the news and entertainment media, the education system, and many State and local governments. Europe is already gone. It's time people woke up and saw what is going on. When a policy is rooted in Socialism or Communism, I will call it Left, and those advocating it a Leftist. My point was valid. The individual Leftist's concern for the downtrodden ends when it's time for the wallet to come out of the pocket. I see it all the time. "You're not leaving a tip?" "No, the waitstaff should be paid a living wage in the first place, and their salary shouldn't depend on the quality of the service!" Right, Che...Who is it again that suffers until that happens? Oh yeah, Monica, our Server for this evening...

Posted by: Darrell at February 10, 2006 09:10 PM (f/jKP)

124 Hello Brother Cat, I am reading your response and the first thing that strikes me is that I have to keep a dictionary handy, your choice of words reflect a higher education level than mine, or else you are extremely well read. When you say I make strw man ? I do not understand. All I was asking you to do is "If not then try to imagine such a person." So in this Scenario you are pretending to be such a person. + Straw man is a technical term in logic and I forget what it means I took my philosophy degree twenty years ago, and it has been some time say three years since I have taught a logic class, so please forgive me if I do not follow you on this technical term. I don't know when the moonbat left and when he will be back. I have not seen his posts But why he is right of center please explain, Also what did moonbat say that was entierely false and what did that have to do with what I was asking you to do? Please enlighten me I do not know what is a social conservative, is that a conservative that sociallizes a lot. Or is it a communist who is quiet and doesn't talk a lot It is not what your saying Mr. Cat it is what you are not that is important. I asked you point blank, can you see Muslims as your brothers and sisters and you go in a round about way to talk about something else. Why cant you simply say yes or no! cause that would be too honest and authentic. Same thing regarding your description of your neighbours, very interesting you fail to mention that they come to your house every weekend for poker nights and some of your best friends are Black and latinos. Instead you say that you work side by side with them... And then you tell me I am full of shit, that is a little below the belt. But I will accept it since you are white and are the superior race. And you further insult me and call me a leftist, when I tell you that Muslims only wash their Bum with the left hand. I use my right hand for every thing else, including eating. You will not see a Muslim eat with those Left hands. See projecting is a technical term and I took psychology lets see in 1976, and I can't remember but I got a "D" in the subject cause I could never get these terms straight. So when you use vocabulary like that it really dampens communication. I have to stop get the dictionary and then there are five different meanings of projection. But I understand what you are saying here. Like I said earlier that you have a way of using words that is of a much higher level than mine. Again I bow to your superior skills of Logic and rhetoric. You know my ideology and unexamined bias, and presuppositions, of course you do, its that superman xray eyes that see through walls. Then I used the word Japs and you avoid the invitation to make friend s with other cultures and go off on my mistyping of japanease (only cause I didn't know the correct speeling of the word) . But my invitation still stands. And if you cannot find anyone worth while, I extend my hand of friendship. Then you can always say that you have a muslim friend and no one could accuse you of disliking muslims. (Unless of course you want to be known as someone who does not like muslims, cause that is in your best interest) In that case I would respect that as well. I am so delighted, you said you are right You’re right about one thing. The notion that one’s personal pride is more important than the very life of the “lesser” members of one’s own family, I find to be very difficult to accept, and frankly abhorrent. Oh but you said I was right !!! Ok difficult to accept but I am right I will take. hey Mr. Cat you are not a bigot in my mind. Unless for some reason you think that is useful. I think you are just like everyone else. You live in Isolation and have few real friends. I offer you my true and real freindship. Something you can count on. But I don't know if you want to lower yourself, and accept my offer. Because I am really not worthy. I do not share your skin color nor your religion nor your values, nor your level of education and intellect. But I think you can teach me lots about this new society in this new world. And I can perhaps impart some wisdom of the east. Like The notion that one’s personal pride is more important than the very life of the “lesser” members of one’s own family" Please consider my offer: Sincerely, Your Muslim brother Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 10, 2006 09:17 PM (GtDum)

125 James, Do you have any pictures of your loved one? Your mother and father? Your wife or girlfriend? Your children? When you look at them and smile and think warm and fuzzy thoughts, are you directing them at the paper? Or the photosensitive emulsion on the print? Or at the actual loved one depicted? I sure it's the latter, unless they don't allow anything sharp in the room where you are staying. Same with Catholics. We are praying to Jesus. Or to a particular Saint hoping for intercession with God. The image, statue, or representation just helps one focus and concentrate. And by the way, if you have any pictures around, don't you know that drawings, pictures, and representations of any living thing were also banned by the same decree that banned those associated with Mohammed, pbuh? Or that representations dating back to the time of Mohammed, pbuh, are common?(even though many were destroyed in later years)...

Posted by: Darrell at February 10, 2006 09:25 PM (f/jKP)

126 I would like to draw a general picture to put everything in perspective about why muslims are more serius about their religion and doesn't even take a joke about it. Europian civilization,The West, have already passed the Era called "Renaissance". European people have opened up to new ideas and art became their life. Than, they started questioning religion with freedom, back then no one could have said anything about religion or judge... Since they have passed this stage and give value to mind and ideas, it is easier for them to joke or take a joke about anything. After that time slowly but sure they differed religion from running their government. Now Religion is a nice part of a government not a way to run a country. As Muslims we still could not pass this stage and we have to understand that every religion sent has it's rules for that time end century. After centuries we have to adjust some rules of our religions to our lives without changing it. And if you ask me there is no country in the world that you can run with religious rules and governing. Also, the drawings are nothig but provocations and a person with great knowledge(especially those who write publication) is %100 aware that those drawing will offend a lot of muslims. Do not forget someone? wrote a book about Muslim Religion and hide years for his life... It is just hard for me to explain thatyou guys can wear your own flag as an underwear. It does not mean that we approve this stupi act. So don't even tell me about "We have a lot of drawings about Jesus and Papa and ...". This has nothing to do to have freedom of speech or ideas. There are some things in life that you cant joke about I think. I hope that I could explained to those with intelligence, to those who didnt understant, well good luck to you...

Posted by: james at February 10, 2006 09:45 PM (sH/nS)

127 Darrel, You wrote "The image, statue, or representation just helps one focus and concentrate." It is so right I agree. But some human beings(which we are not perfect) can create a picture or statue can turn into Gods by TIME. This has alredy happened too many times in human history. In order to stop this what would you do?...

Posted by: James at February 10, 2006 09:53 PM (sH/nS)

128 You are very skilled in the art of sarcasm Mr. Hussain, I will grant you that.

Posted by: Desert Cat at February 10, 2006 11:11 PM (xdX36)

129 Azmat, Do you have anything more to add to the discussion other than baiting my readers?

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 11, 2006 12:17 AM (F7zrJ)

130 Darrell, My objection is to dividing people into left and right and then stereotyping them based on those labels. If only it were that simple :-) Your last post to me illustrates my point. Can you really predict how someone will tip in a restaurant based on being a leftist? That's a bit of a stretch I think. I'm sure you wouldn't make the same predictions about Blacks, Gays, and Jews, so what's the difference? BTW, I didn't discover this thread until Feb. 8 when I made my first post. I thought the derogatory comments about Leftists became excessive, so I spoke up. I didn't see similar comments about the Right, and I don't equate comments about Bush with comments about an entire group. If I'm being unfair let me know. In 2000, I voted for McCain in the primary election and Gore in the general election. Does that make me a leftist or rightist? I am left handed, and another word for the left handed is sinistral, which has the same origins as the word sinister! Uh oh. Darrell, it kind of seems like you're still fighting the Cold War with all the talk about Communists and Socialists. Isn't radical terrorism the real threat to our security now? Regarding the Left having "control of the news and entertainment media, the education system, and many State and local governments," I think Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, and all the Red States might disagree. With control of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches at the federal level, I would argue that the Republicans are in control. If they succeed, they deserve most of the credit. If they fail, they deserve credit for that too.

Posted by: chuck at February 11, 2006 12:50 AM (XEXDN)

131 Yes Attila, I have lots to contribute. For starters, I want to give an open invitation to all on this board to contact me when they are passing Indiana, and enjoy some eastern hospitality. (I make a great curry) Secondly, I consider all of you my brothers and sisters. So please at any point in time you can call me and I will be there for you. Thirdly, I have thoroughly enjoyed our discussion here. What I have learnt about free speach is that my examples were similar to those of Chuck " falsely yelling fire in a theater to get a reaction" And no one except Chuck articulated that so clearly. And everyone here has been so kind in trying to give me information on a subject that is not as hotly debated where I come from. You have to understand English is my second language and I am not very good at expressing myself in it yet. But I am working on it. And one way of doing that is by expressing myself when ever I can. And Mr. Cat I am not being sarcastic when I say that I want to extend my hand of friendship to you. Why would you even say that? There is a reason why I like Mr. Bush, because he speaks the common mans language. Sometimes people who are higher up have a difficult time communicating with those below them. I am of the ordinary man perspective. And because I am trying to improve myself, it is hard for me to communicate at a higher level than where I am; I appologize for that. I extend my hand towards all of you with openness and friendship. This board can be different than other boards where nobody is calling the Muslims any names and the muslims are also respectful of others. Attila, if you do not want me to post further, please ask me, I will oblige. Your loving brother, Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 11, 2006 06:27 AM (GtDum)

132 Hello Chuck, Asalam elukum (means peace be with you) many of the points I make are not made in the press, you would not see Fox channel making those points(sorry: I only watch Fox). You are right the press should criticize, but for some reason they are giving a free pass to this administration. Do you see any pictures of iraqi or Afghani deaths in your press. Two years later we will see pictures like in Vietnam where the colnol excecuted a guy and the picture was taken to show the horrers of war. We are being presented a very censored and sanitized view of an ugly war. Do you see any soldiers being awarded medals of bravery? On TV? As far as theocracies allowing press to criticize, they all do. Because only through dialouge can they improve.(It just makes good common sense, think about it every good chess player knows that, we got to think like the enemy) Only through discussions can we see the other point of view.(and then pick the best) Look for the last five years diverse points of views have been stiffeled in this country. I laugh at all these people who believe in free speach and can't see that they are being fed a sanitized war. And also a whole bunch of propaganda on the war on terror. You can only see that if you are outside the "FOX". If you watch Fox, they will tell you that the war is already won, "mission accomplished" Also their explanation of the odd soldier dying is a heavy insurguncy. The economy is doing great because of the administrations programs, the Country is safe from Terror. On the right hand side there is always a slogan "The war on terror" a constant reminder that we are at war. With who? nobody knows. Anyone with a critical mind can see the inconsistencies. Last month a wal mart opened up near Chicago: 25,000 job applicants. (oh yeh the official figures are that we have the lowest unemployment rate since 2001) Should tell you something about the economy. GM and Delphi, once icons of the economy in trouble, Ford and its stock, and the number of layoffs (IBM, Intel, GE,exporting jobs outside the US) humm. If you point that out you are a doom and gloom pessimist. Can't see all those job creations at walmart. By the way the 25,000 jobs at walmart: This news was later suppressed and people started saying that wal-mart cooked the numbers when they realized that this looks bad. Over and Over again mistakes are made and covered up. Katrina, another example, now Brown says he has emails to prove that the White house was informed earlier than they claim. Watch Fox, they will not have any one like me on to represent the islamic point of view. They will put a panel of journalists, (losers) who have no clue what the Islamic point of view is. Man chuck, what can I say? I am for free speach, it only makes sense, but the kind that is being practised right now, its not free. I think even this board collectively wants to stiffle me because they do not like what I am saying. And you will see (prophetic) that will happen soon. Oh yeh lets not forget all the scandels: how many secretaries have resigned.Secretary of treasury,even Mr. Colin Powell disgraced from public life. what about that Scooter dude, and Abramoff? notice how cleverly that whole stuff is shuffeld under the rug for after the elections. Then you wonder why the right wins every time. Give me control of the news and I will not need a Theocracy. I could submit this whole nation to Islam. Cheers, brother Chuck, and thanks for watching my back. Walekum- Us Salam (Means peace be with you also) Azmat

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 11, 2006 07:20 AM (GtDum)

133 Azmat, I agree that many important stories aren't covered in the mainstream press. There's more infotainment than information. However, I think the Internet is transforming the way we get our news. Now, individuals can be both consumers and reporters of the news. I remember that guy named Salaam Pax blogging from Iraq shortly after the war started. He provided a perspective you couldn't get through conventional channels. The Internet isn't as easily controlled as the press either. They try to control it in China, but it's easy to get around it. I once heard the Internet referred to as "Anarchy by consensus." I think that describes it very well. Of course, one has to be a discriminating consumer as there are few journalistic standards as of yet. Overall, I'm optimistic. Peace.

Posted by: chuck at February 11, 2006 08:21 AM (XEXDN)

134 I am a Muslim, and I want to express my unreserved condemnation for the behaviour of the rioting mobs in 'Muslim' countries that went around burning consulates, properties, flags, etc. I do not want to qualify this apology with any attempts at justifying their actions or claiming that this was the right thing to do given the provocation. It was wrong, period.

Posted by: Riaz Shaikh at February 16, 2006 01:25 PM (p5gzh)

135 My question is: would you publish the pictures of the artists, given that it would bring harm to them or their families? Freedom to offend and harm others is what you guys are promoting.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 18, 2006 04:59 PM (GtDum)

136 Azmat: There is a difference between offending someone and actually harming them. Of course I would not publish the pictures of the artists! They might get hurt. The people who commissioned the cartoons were trying to provoke thought, by asking whether perhaps the volatility of the Muslim world has led the West to censor itself with respect to Islam in ways that it would not censor itself with respect to any other religion. And of course the answer is "yes"--Islam is treated differently, because its adherents reserve the right to react violently. That's morally wrong.

Posted by: Attila Girl at February 18, 2006 09:40 PM (XbEp3)

137 Can you see how much harm, has been brought about by the publication of those cartoons, Lets see 7 dead in Afghanistan, 5 in Pakistan, 15 in Nigeria, and god knows how many more to come. Those cartoons went beyond offending. The people who commisioned those cartoons knew that this would be the reaction. Like you said they were engaging the volitility of the muslim world, this is not a thought prevoking action, this is a violence provoking action. Can you not see the actual harm that has been done? As I said in the beginning of my post you have no clue. You are just ill-informed on this issue. The reason the west has chosen to restrain itself, is because they recognize that it is morally wrong to have a bunch of illiterate people killed so that they could sit around and intellectualize free speach. Let me say this simply and concisely, if the people in the west are so much smarter and superior, then why can they not communicate appropriately (without insults). To be able to communicate you must understand the others point of view. Steven Covey Says, to be understood, first try to understand. I think I see why you fail to see this point, because you are so entrenched in your culture, it is hard for you to step outside of it and see the other point of view. I say those people in this country who did not publish those cartoons, are smart, and understand communication at a higher level. They are what we call civilized and have no need to provoke the animals in the third world.

Posted by: Azmat Hussain at February 19, 2006 07:03 PM (GtDum)

138 The offensive cartoons shouldn't be seen as an action against Muslims, but as a reaction to the violence of Muslim extremists. It's hard to respect people who resort to violence and murder of innocent people in order to achieve their political objectives. If Muslims want the West to respect and accept them for their cultural and religious differences, they should repudiate the actions of Muslim extremists. If Muslims want insulting and offensive cartoons to stop, then they should repudiate the actions of these Muslim extremists who are inspiring the cartoons. The cartoon of an Mohamed wearing a bomb in his turbine would never have been created if Muslim extremists, in the name of their religion, weren't bombing and murdering innocent people going about their lives trying to provide for themselves and their families. If the extremists would stop their senseless acts of terror, their events of violence would not be lampooned in political cartoons.

Posted by: John at February 22, 2006 03:45 PM (YCmu2)

139 Yeh! putting the cart before the ox. The muslims must have done something to the Danes, that prompted them to make the cartoons.

Posted by: luvmyprez at February 22, 2006 05:38 PM (wosqx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Does anyone want some cheese or furniture while I'm out?

How about some beer? Or candy?

Alternatively, you know—I could get you some sort of breakfast pastry.

Laurence says we can stop now, but I happen to like breakfast pastry a lot.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:54 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Jeff of BA seems slightly irritated at the scandal that erupted when Britain's Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association suggested that Islam was homophobic, a statement I cannot see as anything but empirically true, but caused an outcry for its putative bigotry.

In a letter that starts, "Dear Stupid British Homos," he reminds us that

While you queens have been frauleining about gay marriage, homos under barmy Islam have been crushed, hung, stoned, & beheaded. I notice that 60% of British Muslims want Shariah law. Have you seen their birthrate compared to non-Muslim Brits? Maybe GLHA should start running more timely articles like Scaffold-Proof Hair Mousse & Fabulous Accessories from Neck to Toe!

George Bernard Shaw, that pacifist flaneur, said if the Nazis landed, he'd welcome them as tourists. New flash, sisters: the tourists are already in the house. Under Shariah, you'll really be giving head, & not in a good way.

And I could say the same for a lot of idiotic quasi-feminist chicks, who don't quite seem to realize it's hard to live up to your human potential when you're denied education, beaten, kept under house arrest, swaddled in a desert clime, and occasionally murdered for the crime of having been raped.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:20 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I could say the same for a lot of idiotic quasi-feminist chicks SELF-HATER!

Posted by: Darleen at January 07, 2006 11:18 AM (FgfaV)

2 occasionally murdered for the crime of having been raped Or occasionally murdered because you might commit adultery like an elder sibling did. Can't be too careful, you know...darn females! Wait...I thought the reward for "martyrdom" was 72 virgins? what's wrong with that picture? Women are no good in the here and now, but they're perfectly fine in the afterlife???

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at January 07, 2006 03:45 PM (1hM1d)

3 As I love to point out, Christian and Jewish martyrs get experienced women who know what they're doing in the sack; the fact that Muslims are stuck with virgins shows that God doesn't like them quite as much.

Posted by: Attila Girl at January 07, 2006 06:09 PM (zZMVu)

4 You're all jumping to conclusions here - what makes you think the virgins are female? Or even bipedal?

Posted by: Steve Skubinna at January 07, 2006 09:09 PM (j4Cpd)

5 Steve, you slay me.

Posted by: Attila Girl at January 07, 2006 09:37 PM (zZMVu)

6 Hopefully with fully developed vaginal and anal dentata...

Posted by: Darrell at January 07, 2006 09:38 PM (itie5)

7 The best pic about this subject was the kamikaze bomber arriving in the after life and being told "Actually, *you're* the virgin."

Posted by: John at January 08, 2006 06:33 PM (3z9W/)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This is a hard essay to read, despite the fact that it covered some material Steyn had discussed when he gave his speech at the Claremont Institute. I can argue all day long about his tossed-off allusion to "the gay agenda," a phrase that always bothers me when I hear it, but the main thrust of his piece seems very correct to me: the West is in trouble. Europe is in trouble. And within 20 years the modern world may well consist of China, India, South America, Australia, Southern Africa, and the United States. Europe stands a very good chance of living under Sharia law by then, given the demographic changes that are afoot.

The U.S. makes babies at just the replacement rate, and most Western Democracies fall well below that minimum level. The people who appear to be producing the next generation are largely Muslims, and many of them live either in countries that reject individuality, democracy and pluralism, or in communties within European cities that do the same thing.

Europe by the end of this century will be a continent after the neutron bomb: the grand buildings will still be standing but the people who built them will be gone. We are living through a remarkable period: the self-extinction of the races who, for good or ill, shaped the modern world.

What will Europe be like at the end of this process? Who knows? On the one hand, there’s something to be said for the notion that America will find an Islamified Europe more straightforward to deal with than Monsieur Chirac, Herr Schröder, and Co. On the other hand, given Europe’s track record, getting there could be very bloody. But either way this is the real battlefield. The al Qaeda nutters can never find enough suicidal pilots to fly enough planes into enough skyscrapers to topple America. But, unlike us, the Islamists think long-term, and, given their demographic advantage in Europe and the tone of the emerging Muslim lobby groups there, much of what they’re flying planes into buildings for they’re likely to wind up with just by waiting a few more years. The skyscrapers will be theirs; why knock ’em over?

A tough read, but an important one. Please go.

UPDATE: Goldstein quotes Steyn's essay at length, in particular relating his points about our civilization's priorities to the current flap over NSA "eavesdropping."

Via Mike Marinacci, who has a new book out. If you, like I, think Marinacci should revise and reissue Mysterious California, send me a note to that effect and I'll pass it along. That's grass-roots action, Kids. There's also a rumor that he's done some research for a book on strange phenomena in the entire Southwest, which I'd personally love to read.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:11 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 3 kb.

(the deity, not the blogger) I'd single out Indonesia for the next natural disaster.

But, you know: women are vicious that way.

(h/t: Beautiful Atrocities)

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:42 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Hey. If Christians were able to stop killing each other over what brand of Christianity they choose, there is hope that Muslims will stop oppressing women, if women—and the civilized world—so insist.

And it's worth noting that in some strains of Judaism women are also required to cover their heads. I've even heard that this was required in Roman Catholic churches a few generations ago.

The problem isn't head coverings per se, or even gender segregation: it's contempt for female intellect/leadership, and equation of women with sexuality.

Posted by: Attila at 12:32 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

One woman asks the Islamic world to please figure it out. Soon.

Via Percifield, who's back at work on Real Projects, and therefore taking it easy on the blogging. But be sure to read through the "greatest hits" on his sidebar.

Posted by: Attila at 12:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

I had meant to link this post last week: Stacy discusses the extreme misogyny in much of Islamic culture (while showing off her rather impressive arms).

I would assert that there are strains of Islam that are not any more oppressive to women than, say, Orthodox Judaism (in fact, the restrictions are similar: covering the head and so forth). But certainly our enemies, the Islamo-fascists or Islamists (versus ordinary Muslims), view women as slaves. A woman in my country in the nineteenth century was far better off than most women in many Muslim countries.

I don't happen to be against Islam, but I am dead-set against Islamo-fascism, and I don't care for those who believe slavery is A-OK as long as it's "part of your culture."

Posted by: Attila at 12:58 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.