Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

/me can just imagine it now... After defeating Santa Claus over Christmas, Jesus takes on Mohammed in the ONE-ON-ONE ULTIMATE PROPHET SHOWDOWN!!!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
edit: hmm, perhaps we should bring this up over in the Dominions forum... throw in a few Pretender-Gods to the mix and we can REALLY have a party! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

It seems a little hypocritical for the Malaysian PM to say that it's not representative of the Muslim world, or that most Muslims have avoided denunciations of the West, Jews, etc., when the people of his own country are marching in the streets shouting "Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush. Destroy America." (Also quoted from your article. Someone read it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif ) Seems he doesn't have a leg to stand upon when his own people are doing that...

Also rather odd, since as far as I know, American newspapers haven't published the cartoons...but I guess "Destroy America" is just the standard refrain nowadays. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

I wonder how the Muslim world would react if Christians started marching in the streets shouting "Destroy Islam, Destroy Mecca, Destroy Medina, Destroy the Muslims!"

The point is, you do see some Muslims marching the streets spouting off their violent propaganda. You don't see any other religions doing that.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

"Why don't moderate muslims who don't like the violence stand up against those who are causing it?"

Because they would be killed.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

all the people of Malaysia?

No, but what they do see is a very christian president bush and PM blair (Bush has made several references to being inspired by God regarding his actions wrt the middle east) actively MAKING WAR on middle eastern countries. I mean come on, what's more intimidating? A bunch of angry civilians marching and shouting 12000 miles away, or a couple of nuclear superpowers stomping around, blowing [censored] up and killing people by the thousand in the country next door.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

Good point there Dogscoff. We all know that there is absolutely no evidence what so ever that President Bush and PM Blair are on a holly war in the middle east. But the fanic radicalized holly warriors of Ala might believe in such tripe.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

I never said all the people of Malaysia. But if even a significant number of the people are marching in the streets, it is still hypocritical.

Granted, that explains the distrust and perhaps hatred of the US and Britain. But does it explain the hatred and denunciation of Jews and the West in general? For example, the French government was adamantly opposed to the war in Iraq. West /= US. West = Canada + US + Most of Europe + Australia.

Perhaps they think that all of the West is the enemy and wants to kill them all and destroy their religion. Thing is, if they do believe this, that doesn't matter. Ignorance is no excuse in any country. It is up to the people to discover the truth behind a matter, rather than exploding at every opportunity.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

How can any of us truly understand the minds of those for whom violence and outrage has become a way of life unless we have walked in their shoes?

I wouldn't not excuse such behavior regardless of circumstance, but understanding it might be the first step toward stopping it.

I really don't like to make Nasi comparissons here but honestly this is the best case for this arguement. In Nazi Germany the Nazi Party used the Jews as the glue that held the nation together under Hitler. Hate the Jews, hate them to the core, and keep on hating them no matter what. This menatlity gave power to Hitler and he used it like any good Facist to maintain the focus of his people on hating the jews to preserve his controll over them while he ran the country into a devistating war that ultimately resulted in a horrific end for the German people.

I see the leaders of these muslim countries, their religious leaders, and Imans all doing the same thing that Hitler and his Facist Nazi party did. They focus the hatred of their people against a common enemy in order to maintain power.

The only way to combat this is with TRUTH. Unfortunetly any one cought trying to tell the truth is quickly murdered.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

I hereby invoke Godwin's law . But since we're playing "Who's the Hitler?", can I have a go? I love this game.

Here's one for ya- first suitable google hit I came across. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articl...itler-Bush.htm

(Not that I necessarily agree with everything in the article above, I'm just making the point that anyone can play the Hitler card.)

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

Well, it is a free country, so people can say more or less anything they want. Let’s look at his first statement. Bush was elected by a majority of the Electoral College. This is an undisputable fact. It is the way it has always been done in this country. It was a close election but there have been close ones in the past. The difference was that in the past the defeated candidate has politely accepted the results and for the good of the country, moved on. Gore did not put the good of the country above his own ambition.



While Bush has not been a very good president, he has not been a bad one either. Everyone forgets that he has defended this country from the likes of Bin Hidden (his new name). The big news of late is NSA intercepts of overseas calls. Well duah……Here’s your sign. WTF do these people think the NSA has been doing for the last twenty years. Let’s take a look at the last two administrations. Which one spent 8 years trying to change the definition/meaning of one of the amendment of the constitution so as to take away a guaranteed right? They didn’t use the constitutional tool provided for doing this, they tried to do it by using the back door. Exactly what Hitler did when he disarmed the private citizens of Germany. Which administration used its “paramilitary” forces to kill the most of its own citizens? Citizens that for right or wrong had decided to arm themselves against just exactly that kind of government action. Citizens that the government slandered publicly as an excuse for murdering them. Citizens who either never got their day in court or only after being treated worse than we treat foreign terrorist today. Sound anything like Hitler? You bet it does. All the while we were attacking our own; we were shooting missiles at Iraq every time the Washington Post front paged a story about the strange goings on at the White House. No wonder they hated us! Who let them get away with bombing ships and embassies without taking immediate and visible action in the face of a clear and present danger? But instead, decided to do nothing, or to shoot some more SLCM at Baghdad. It’s no wonder that they became bolder with the passage of time. Hitler went on the radio and flat out lied to his people. I seem to recall a president shaking his finger in my face from the TV as he told a bold out and out lie.


The point here is that most presidents have an agenda that is counter to about half of the population. And some well versed academic will publish some well written words that bend the truth to match his needs. Hitler is an easy comparison. For all of his wrongs, the biggest was that he lost. Stalin and Mao won, while Pol Pot [sp] hid his better than the rest. It’s not so much about what a president does or does not do. The several hundred fine people elected to duty on the Hill and the thousands that “make” policy from over at State should carry more of the blame. We are in a catch 22. The Arab world needs someone to hate and blame their Islamic misfortune on. So they pick Israel and the USofA. Not realistically much we can do about that. Personally, I would like to see the west start a new Manhattan project to move the world away from carbon fuel and into hydrogen and cold fusion. Then the Islamic world could keep their oil and go quietly back to the Stone Age.

As to the author, I think that the time of these people would be better spent blogging about the exportation of jobs and wealth. Or perhaps the stacking of the Supreme Court. The 60’s are gone, but some leftovers see this war as a chance to regain past prestige. They fail to realize that this one is much different than the last one. In Iraq, everyone volunteered. There is no draft. In Iraq, poor people of color are not doing the majority of the fighting. It’s middleclass whitebread America filling out the ranks. In Iraq there are not 500,000 troops and casualties are not even a percentage point of what they were in SEA. The major news agencies would like to keep the war on the front page, and it is running up an awful bill that we will have to pay. But most Americans are more worried about their jobs, the cost of energy and who will be the next American Idol. It, 2006 and the sixties are long gone.

Re: OT: Muhammed-caricatyres and freedom of speach
 

Well, news is pretty much focussed on the bad things.
So it sounds pretty bad from over here.

Can we get a list of the good things?