French Mohammed cartooons

[Jub]

Who but a rabid dog would bite the hand that tries to rid them of mange?

An abused dog, maybe?

It's easy to be all " but I wouldn't riot like that" when you grow up with privilege, because people actually listen to you when you ave a problem. Compare that to the Muslims: nobody gives a shit about what's going on where they are unless people are dying. And don't give some bullshit about them being able to make their displeasure known with peaceful protests. Like CNN would even give enough of a shit to report on That. Even then, the West's response to the situation is not "let's try to improve relations with the Middle East so that they won't see events like this as yet another round of us being Imperialistic pricks to them" but rather "let's insult them MOAR because the best way to get them to understand freedom is to use it to undermine their culture."

Perhaps, but even an abused dog should be able to tell what the actions of one man are versus the actions of a people as a whole. Though perhaps, when they are so abused and then fed the information filtered through a bunch of people that want to keep them poor and angry they really don't have a choice in how they act. At any rate, we can't live in fear of what they will do and we can't ask artists, for even people making the sort of movie are artists, to censor themselves for fear of what some people who's lives suck might do about it.

[Civil War Man]

The blame doesn't lay, even in part, on the creator of the video or cartoon, the blame starts with the people who use it to whip people into a frenzy and ends with the person committing acts of violence. In your example, the cartoonists and video creators merely cut the wood and pumped the gas, the religious leaders and figure heads stacked the kindling, and religious extremists are the burning head of the match.

The cartoonists and video creators cut the wood and pumped the gas specifically so it would be used to start the fire. How are you incapable of understanding that? The creator of Innocence of Muslims didn't create the video because yay free speech. He created the video solely to cause problems. It's why he didn't tell the actors what he was actually doing and redubbed all of their lines. It's why he hid behind aliases. It's why he made up the bullshit story about the film being backed by an Israeli cabal.

Oh, and you are utterly failing to convince the hypothetical Libyan internet user. Because you still immediately fall upon comparing him and everyone he knows to mindless animals.

His family and neighbors are more likely to desire to kill somebody than my family. They likely are less tolerant than most people I will deal with in a year. Their neighbors kill soldiers who came to their nation in response to deadly attacks on civilians. Even when our soldiers dig ditches and provide aid they fall under attack and call for us to leave. Who but a rabid dog would bite the hand that tries to rid them of mange?

Because among these "innocent" soldiers that dig ditches, there are also the ones who execute women and children and cut off their thumbs as souvenirs. Soldiers that never face justice because the US won't allow them to face trial for their crimes.

Even then, the West's response to the situation is not "let's try to improve relations with the Middle East so that they won't see events like this as yet another round of us being Imperialistic pricks to them" but rather "let's insult them MOAR because the best way to get them to understand freedom is to use it to undermine their culture."

I know there were people on this very board who were calling for violent suppression of the peaceful protests because they felt the Egyptians were not smart enough to make decisions for themselves. They felt that the Egyptians required a very specifically US-friendly dictator because otherwise Egyptian society would just collapse into an orgy of looting, killing, and genital mutilation.

Perhaps, but even an abused dog should be able to tell what the actions of one man are versus the actions of a people as a whole.

Have you even met an abused dog? I can tell you from experience that that is not true. They will snap at you if you so much as move unexpectedly.

[Jub]

The cartoonists and video creators cut the wood and pumped the gas specifically so it would be used to start the fire. How are you incapable of understanding that? The creator of Innocence of Muslims didn't create the video because yay free speech. He created the video solely to cause problems. It's why he didn't tell the actors what he was actually doing and redubbed all of their lines. It's why he hid behind aliases. It's why he made up the bullshit story about the film being backed by an Israeli cabal.

Oh, and you are utterly failing to convince the hypothetical Libyan internet user. Because you still immediately fall upon comparing him and everyone he knows to mindless animals.

Even if they did it's still art. Art that pisses people off has no less value than art the pleases all.

I also don't really care about convincing that Libyan of anything. It's unlikely that I could convince him of anything anyway.

Because among these "innocent" soldiers that dig ditches, there are also the ones who execute women and children and cut off their thumbs as souvenirs. Soldiers that never face justice because the US won't allow them to face trial for their crimes.

Cute, you're implying that a large enough fraction of soldiers deployed are not innocent with those quotes. You're also implying that these people are too stupid to understand that one soldier doesn't speak for all soldiers.

Have you even met an abused dog? I can tell you from experience that that is not true. They will snap at you if you so much as move unexpectedly.

I'm glad you liked my example enough to use it. If you accept that these people are so dense as to act like an abused dog then you admit there is very little that we can do to reason with them. If they are people then we should expect them to conduct themselves as such and listen to reason.

[Akhlut]

I actually post something resembling a plan, just like Jub-Jub the Cur asked for, and he ignores it. He keeps calling Muslims dogs like it ain't no thang and refuses to acknowledge that, in fact, everyone in Dar al-Islam has more than enough legitimate reasons to hate and be suspicious of the West until everyone over 8 years old is dead (so, about 80+ years), yet Jub-Jub the Cur still hobbles on about "rabid dogs" and shit without realizing one iota of context.

You remind me of Chris Brown tattooing Rihanna's battered face on his neck. You don't merely live in a fog of ignorance, you fucking revel in it like a pig in shit.

[ray245]

I also don't really care about convincing that Libyan of anything. It's unlikely that I could convince him of anything anyway.

Do you think about the consequences of your action then? You do realise that continued provocation is going to result in even more mistrust and violence in the middle east?

If you do not respect any Middle Easterner, why should you ask them to respect your values and rights?

[General Mung Beans]

Seriously, though, in a very broad manner, the best thing we can do is provide the people education, forgive all debts they owe to any nations, offer help without strings attached while keeping our military presence down to a minimum, while admitting a long, brutal legacy of fuck ups. It might not be the perfect plan, but it should engender a shitload more goodwill than supporting brutal dictatorships for decades.

How much aid would be feasible without proping up the various Middle Eastern dictators? Plus the Gulf monarchies are quite prosperous (for the citizens at least) albeit oppressed by religious law.

[Jub]

I actually post something resembling a plan, just like Jub-Jub the Cur asked for, and he ignores it. He keeps calling Muslims dogs like it ain't no thang and refuses to acknowledge that, in fact, everyone in Dar al-Islam has more than enough legitimate reasons to hate and be suspicious of the West until everyone over 8 years old is dead (so, about 80+ years), yet Jub-Jub the Cur still hobbles on about "rabid dogs" and shit without realizing one iota of context.

You remind me of Chris Brown tattooing Rihanna's battered face on his neck. You don't merely live in a fog of ignorance, you fucking revel in it like a pig in shit.

How do you expect the West to keep every citizen from doing something that offends Dar al-Islam? What do you propose we do about the ones that do get offended?

The thing is, most Americans hate the Middle East and don't feel the need to respect them. We hate them because they blew up one of our buildings and the news we see shows them shooting at our soldiers and suicide bombing their own people. Then we see them get killing mad over some overhyped art.

How do you deal with a man who sees red over something you find tame?

I also don't really care about convincing that Libyan of anything. It's unlikely that I could convince him of anything anyway.

Do you think about the consequences of your action then? You do realise that continued provocation is going to result in even more mistrust and violence in the middle east?

If you do not respect any Middle Easterner, why should you ask them to respect your values and rights?

What actions have I taken? I've drawn no comics to enrage them. I'm just saying that they need to learn to shut up and deal. Art isn't worth killing over.

Also I don't hate all followers of Islam, I've attacked the ones that kill innocent people and the governments that are too weak to keep terrorist cells from carrying out attacks against civilian targets.

[Civil War Man]

I also don't really care about convincing that Libyan of anything. It's unlikely that I could convince him of anything anyway.

And that is why you fail. You accuse muslims of being closed-minded and violent, and dismiss even the possibility of opening a dialog out of hand.

Cute, you're implying that a large enough fraction of soldiers deployed are not innocent with those quotes. You're also implying that these people are too stupid to understand that one soldier doesn't speak for all soldiers.

One of the major problems with conflicts like Vietnam and Iraq is that the enemy the soldiers are fighting blend in with the rest of the populace. A guerilla fighter who just planted an IED looks exactly like an ordinary citizen who just wants to go about their day.

On the flip side, the war criminal soldiers who kill civilians and take pieces of the corpses as trophies look identical to the normal soldiers who just want to finish their tour and go home.

When you are living under a military occupation, how much are you going to trust the average soldier when you have no way of knowing whether the soldier you are dealing with will let you go about your day, or if they'd just as soon shoot you and dump your corpse in a ditch?

I'm glad you liked my example enough to use it. If you accept that these people are so dense as to act like an abused dog then you admit there is very little that we can do to reason with them. If they are people then we should expect them to conduct themselves as such and listen to reason.

Lus brought up the abused dog analogy, in response to your rabid dog analogy. I corrected your strange misconception that any creature who has been abused will be able to distinguish their abuser from something else that just looks and acts like their abuser.

If a man in a Hawaiian shirt were to show up and beat you within an inch of your life every day, you will very quickly learn to not trust people wearing Hawaiian shirts, and will probably either run away or lash out whenever you see someone wearing one approach. It would take a great deal of therapy to unlearn that reaction to Hawaiian shirts, and anyone who wears one around you while knowing your condition is irresponsible at best, and an asshole intentionally interfering with your recovery at worst.

If you are at all interested in helping people in the Middle East, realize that you are actively preventing this from happening every time you say muslims should "just get over" whatever the latest insult it, regardless of the severity of that insult. The only message that sort of arrogance conveys is that you approve of the insult. The only way we can improve our relationship with the people of that region is if the volume of the outcry denouncing the hate speech is louder than the volume of the hate speech itself.

If you are not interested in helping people in the Middle East, please let us know so we can stop pretending that this is about nebulous freedoms as opposed to just plain racism.

Also I don't hate all followers of Islam, I've attacked the ones that kill innocent people and the governments that are too weak to keep terrorist cells from carrying out attacks against civilian targets.

And yet you dismiss a completely imaginary muslim out of hand. I pose a hypothetical of a generic muslim and point out the problems they might have with the attitudes in this thread and others like them, and ask you to explain why he should withhold his judgement, and your mind immediately defaults to him being too stupid, arrogant, violent, stubborn, and/or uncivilized to be worthy of even attempting a dialog.

[ray245]

What actions have I taken? I've drawn no comics to enrage them. I'm just saying that they need to learn to shut up and deal. Art isn't worth killing over.

On one hand you are saying you don't care whether a Muslim follower should listen to you, and on the other hand, you are arguing they should listen to your opinion. Make up your mind.

Furthermore, you seems to be extremely naive to think that they will learn to shut up and deal with all the insults just because of the words of some westerners.

[Jub]

I also don't really care about convincing that Libyan of anything. It's unlikely that I could convince him of anything anyway.

And that is why you fail. You accuse muslims of being closed-minded and violent, and dismiss even the possibility of opening a dialog out of hand.

I said that I don't care, because I can't change a damned thing either way. I would much rather we have good relations with all nations on this planet, but I don't feel comfortable censuring anybody to do so. Yes the movies and the comics are low blows and in poor taste, but the ability to do that is part of our freedoms and I don't like giving up rights without being sure that I can get them back.

One of the major problems with conflicts like Vietnam and Iraq is that the enemy the soldiers are fighting blend in with the rest of the populace. A guerilla fighter who just planted an IED looks exactly like an ordinary citizen who just wants to go about their day.

On the flip side, the war criminal soldiers who kill civilians and take pieces of the corpses as trophies look identical to the normal soldiers who just want to finish their tour and go home.

When you are living under a military occupation, how much are you going to trust the average soldier when you have no way of knowing whether the soldier you are dealing with will let you go about your day, or if they'd just as soon shoot you and dump your corpse in a ditch?

These nations have partially brought this occupation upon themselves by allowing people who openly threaten the west to live freely. If they were willing to deal with that then we wouldn't be there. If they had a dedicated agency that dealt with these people we wouldn't be in this mess. I'd be willing to bet that if a group of US citizens called for the fall of the Middle East and started forming plots to conduct unsanctioned attacks against it most Western governments would deal with it swiftly.

Lus brought up the abused dog analogy, in response to your rabid dog analogy. I corrected your strange misconception that any creature who has been abused will be able to distinguish their abuser from something else that just looks and acts like their abuser.

If a man in a Hawaiian shirt were to show up and beat you within an inch of your life every day, you will very quickly learn to not trust people wearing Hawaiian shirts, and will probably either run away or lash out whenever you see someone wearing one approach. It would take a great deal of therapy to unlearn that reaction to Hawaiian shirts, and anyone who wears one around you while knowing your condition is irresponsible at best, and an asshole intentionally interfering with your recovery at worst.

That might be true, but I wouldn't kill my neighbor because a guy in a Hawaiian shirt taunted me over the internet. Nor would I go on a rampage against a Hawaiian shirt store. I'm smart enough to know who the threat is from.

If you are at all interested in helping people in the Middle East, realize that you are actively preventing this from happening every time you say muslims should "just get over" whatever the latest insult it, regardless of the severity of that insult. The only message that sort of arrogance conveys is that you approve of the insult. The only way we can improve our relationship with the people of that region is if the volume of the outcry denouncing the hate speech is louder than the volume of the hate speech itself.

If you are not interested in helping people in the Middle East, please let us know so we can stop pretending that this is about nebulous freedoms as opposed to just plain racism.

They call for our destruction all the time and if they were holding the bigger stick what do you think they would be doing to us right now? I find it hard to be sympathetic towards people calling for the end of my freedoms, though I would support anybody that could give them the same freedoms I enjoy.

And yet you dismiss a completely imaginary muslim out of hand. I pose a hypothetical of a generic muslim and point out the problems they might have with the attitudes in this thread and others like them, and ask you to explain why he should withhold his judgement, and your mind immediately defaults to him being too stupid, arrogant, violent, stubborn, and/or uncivilized to be worthy of even attempting a dialog.

What can I say to that man that he will listen to? I think his religion is a crock, I think his government is a mess, and I know many of his people would see me dead for my beliefs. I share very little common ground with him and he hates me for things I haven't done. If he wishes to think in that way I can do nothing for him.

What actions have I taken? I've drawn no comics to enrage them. I'm just saying that they need to learn to shut up and deal. Art isn't worth killing over.

On one hand you are saying you don't care whether a Muslim follower should listen to you, and on the other hand, you are arguing they should listen to your opinion. Make up your mind.

Furthermore, you seems to be extremely naive to think that they will learn to shut up and deal with all the insults just because of the words of some westerners.

I don't give a shit if he listens to me or not. I just think he shouldn't get violent if people make fun of his magic man in the sky. When he does become violent I expect my nation to stop him by whatever means are needed to keep its citizens safe. If that means killing men who get enraged over images then so be it. Men shouldn't kill men over pictures, I was taught better than that before grade school.

[Crazedwraith]

The thing is, most Americans hate the Middle East and don't feel the need to respect them. We hate them because they blew up one of our buildings and the news we see shows them shooting at our soldiers and suicide bombing their own people. Then we see them get killing mad over some overhyped art.

Oh man, oh man, oh man. To borrow your own phrasology then; "it's too bad those stupid american dogs can't tell the difference between the actions of a relatively small terrorist organisation and the attitudes of the entire people of the middle east"

[mr friendly guy]

These nations have partially brought this occupation upon themselves by allowing people who openly threaten the west to live freely. If they were willing to deal with that then we wouldn't be there. If they had a dedicated agency that dealt with these people we wouldn't be in this mess. I'd be willing to bet that if a group of US citizens called for the fall of the Middle East and started forming plots to conduct unsanctioned attacks against it most Western governments would deal with it swiftly.
.

What. The. Fuck.

If the US threatens another country, its ok for someone else to hypothetically occupy them as well, assuming they have the military means. Or is this a might makes right scenario? Because I can think of several cases where the US allows to "live freely" people openly threatening other nations, including cases where the person living freely is the fucking president.

[salm]

How do you expect the West to keep every citizen from doing something that offends Dar al-Islam? What do you propose we do about the ones that do get offended?

This strikes me as particularily hypocritical. You expect the Middle East to keep all their citizens from doing something with the threat of invading. On the other hand you don´t expect your own nation to keep their citizens from doing something because it´s probably impossible.

If you were logically consistent you´d want a Middle Eastern Country to invade your Nation because obviously your government is too week to keep the rabid dogs it governs in check.

[Jub]

How do you expect the West to keep every citizen from doing something that offends Dar al-Islam? What do you propose we do about the ones that do get offended?

This strikes me as particularily hypocritical. You expect the Middle East to keep all their citizens from doing something with the threat of invading. On the other hand you don´t expect your own nation to keep their citizens from doing something because it´s probably impossible.

If you were logically consistent you´d want a Middle Eastern Country to invade your Nation because obviously your government is too week to keep the rabid dogs it governs in check.

Except that I'm not in the US. Canada only went over at all due to treaties and badgering by the US.

[Akhlut]

You remind me of Chris Brown tattooing Rihanna's battered face on his neck. You don't merely live in a fog of ignorance, you fucking revel in it like a pig in shit.

How do you expect the West to keep every citizen from doing something that offends Dar al-Islam? What do you propose we do about the ones that do get offended?

Thanks for proving my point.

The thing is, most Americans hate the Middle East and don't feel the need to respect them. We hate them because they blew up one of our buildings and the news we see shows them shooting at our soldiers and suicide bombing their own people.

If merely blowing up a single building and killing 3,000 people is adequate to provoke that sort of hatred, then the Muslims were more than justified in flying a plane into the WTC in the first place.

Then we see them get killing mad over some overhyped art.

Jesus, did you fail reading comprehension as a child or something? I fucking hate repeating myself, so, short version: the art is the last straw to break the camel's back. Two centuries of imperialism and oppression are going in front of this and then they see overt hatred being leveled at them. Of course they'll be pissed, shit-for-brains.

How do you deal with a man who sees red over something you find tame?

With respect and understanding, perhaps?

[Akhlut]

Except that I'm not in the US. Canada only went over at all due to treaties and badgering by the US.

Canadians can't control their own nation, ergo, it should be occupied by people who can make sure it doesn't do stupid bullshit.

[Connor MacLeod]

I would like to know why people continuing to point out the obvious (that some Muslims are violent reactionary fanatics) somehow precludes some sort of tolerance or reaching out in order to try and stop them being fanatics (kind of like how Aaron and Stark pointed out in the opening pages.) I find it rather curious that there is an impilcit assumption that the two ends are somehow mutually exclusive, even though that isn't really the case, and also that somehow 'stating the curious' is somehow just as important (or moreso) than actually taking actions to resolve the step regardless of the why.

[wautd]

Muslim fundies want that everyone respect their religion, which I'll do... they day they show respect to other worldviews themselves. Untill then, fuck Mohammed/Allah with a pork chop on a stick.

[ray245]

Muslim fundies want that everyone respect their religion, which I'll do... they day they show respect to other worldviews themselves. Untill then, fuck Mohammed/Allah with a pork chop on a stick.

Isn't that terribly unfair on the moderates who make less of a fuss over the cartoons?

[Akhlut]

Muslim fundies want that everyone respect their religion, which I'll do... they day they show respect to other worldviews themselves. Untill then, fuck Mohammed/Allah with a pork chop on a stick.

So, you'll only respect a group if their most extreme members are respectful of all worldviews?

Guess you better get started hating the entire species, then. :V

[Connor MacLeod]

Muslim fundies want that everyone respect their religion, which I'll do... they day they show respect to other worldviews themselves. Untill then, fuck Mohammed/Allah with a pork chop on a stick.

To put this in perspective. If there's a hole in the boat and you're sinking, are you going to make an effort to try to patch it up, even if the hole isn't your fault, or are you going to wait until the hole just magically repairs itself?

Yes, in an ideal world it would be nice if people didn't force other people to make an effort to be more reasonable or accomodating than neccessary because they may or may not act the best. But that doesn't mean that being equally intransigent until they stop being intransigent is the best way to solve the problem.

So, what is more important: resolving the issue, or being right?

[wautd]

Muslim fundies want that everyone respect their religion, which I'll do... they day they show respect to other worldviews themselves. Untill then, fuck Mohammed/Allah with a pork chop on a stick.

Isn't that terribly unfair on the moderates who make less of a fuss over the cartoons?

Terribly unfair? I'm sure they'll get over it but they're free to throw an insult back.

[Connor MacLeod]

Terribly unfair? I'm sure they'll get over it but they're free to throw an insult back.

Why should the world operate strictly according to the way you think people should act/think/feel/etc.? What makes your view on matters inherently superior to all others?

[Connor MacLeod]

Actually here's a better way to put things: I gather the impression is that 'Muslim fundamentalists aren't going to be reasonable, so there's no reason I should be reasonable at all.' Which sounds an awful lot like 'Eye for an Eye', which is - to me at least - a rather a dodgy strategy in interpersonal relations (I mean look at the US post 9/11.. I'm not sure waging war on people we perceived attacking us has been the optimal outcome although some might disagree.)

The thing is, though, fairness/unfairness or right/wrong don't really enter into it. If one side is intransigent, being equally intransigent simply won't resolve things at all. Making the extra effort even if it inconveniences you, just to reach out or be accomodating may not work either (or work easily), but it stands a far better chance of doing something than 'eye for an eye' does. I think that's also kinda the point some people (like Aaron and I think Stark) tried making earlier in the thread.

[wautd]

I just don't think that the Islamic faith should get special treatment regarding free speech or criticism against it simply because it has a high number of extremists willing to use violence at the slightest of provocation. If anything, it deserves to be mocked even more.