Embassy burning over a few cartoons... Justified?
144345
I think it is the definition if irony. The Muslums are upset over the depiction of their prophet with a bomb for a turban and they then commit terrorist acts. They are provint the cartoon to be accurate. Have you seen any other religion act like this? Look at all of the bad depictions of Jesus there are. Do christians go around threatening violence?
125304
I would support the restrictions on screaming fire, etc. in a crowded theater. Such language does not really communicate any idea, but is only meant to hurt. It is basically an assault with words. It has no place in my ideal government.\nAs far as offending religions i think we should have the right to do that. It may be hurtful, but not all speech is flattering. We should have the right to make offensive cartoons. How people react to such speech is what should be dealt with, but the speech itself is not the problem.\nAlthough questioning tragedies like the holocaust seems insane, its not something we should regulate. Who knows how far it could be taken. It could evolve into not questioning the politics of a particular president. We should always have the right to evaluate history even if we're not very good at it.\nPornographic images are not pleasing to all people, but it mostly boils down to a moral question that is highly subjective. People who enjoy pornography should have every right to enjoy it. We can't make judgment on what type of media is "good" and what is "bad." pornography would be welcome in my ideal government.\nFinally, hate speech. That's a tough one because like shouting out "fire", hate speech only strives to hurt and offend. Does it also mean to communicate? to spread ideas? i'm not sure. I don't really completely understand the intentions of those who make hate speech. I know i disagree with them, but that's not where i stop my analysis. This issue is more ambiguous to me than the others, but still my gut tells me that i would allow it in my own government. I think most of society doesn't really have an open ear to hate speech anyways. If people must make hateful comments they can go ahead and do it. Society will probably ostracize them anyways.
1152654
Yes, it can be justified. We are trying to get rid of people who feel it is right to blow up civilians who are not the ones making decisions that they might disagree with. These are the same people that blow up college students sitting in cafes in Israel. If these people targeted military only, it would be a bit different, but they don't. I think GWB is doing the right thing by staying the course and trying everything he can to finish the job. I feel bad that we are losing soldiers, but unfortunately it happens.
1020357
Because it was proven that the cartoons. that were printed by the Newspaper were not the cartoons. that were shown to the islamic imans in Iran. And further more no person seems to be able to say anything bad or derogatory. about the Muslim Religion.\nBut for any other religion its ok for people to make fun of them.
781155
This is quite possibly a setup, done to promote "sensitivity" for their cause. They need to be held for a through investigation and face arrest if this is shown to be the case.\n\nAnd really, they should be charged and thrown into jail for inciting this disturbance, in any event. It's much worse than yelling fire in a theater in view of what has transpired in recent times. \n\nNo one can convince me that they didn't know what they were doing.
119722
Since some of those cartoons were also published in an Egyptian paper months earlier (presumably to condemn them), then I guess the Danish aren't alone.\n\nBesides, Danish laws of free expression apply to people in Denmark. If you want the cartoons to be censored because of other peoples's laws, then you should be ready to accept outside judgments on your culture as well.\n\nAnd besides again, the protests are driven much more by local politics than the nature of the cartoon.
728417
i think it is disgraceful!!-we have lost the freedom of speech in the UK and are now being forced to bow down and comply with the wishes of individuals and organizations who preach racial hatred far louder than the two gentlemen to which you refer. when you consider that certain characters were allowed to preach hatred on the streets of london only a few months ago unmolested by the law only serves to fuel my disgust and contempt for this puppet government. the only reason the two gentlemen are in court is because certain government officials know they have ballsed up on the asylum issue and all they want to do is bury their head in the sand and pretend its not happening-well i am afraid it is. and but for the two men in the dock no-one would know the truth. i wish them good luck.
146985
Whoa there knobstick, your words make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up!  I don't think that cartoons of religious figures should be printed or sketched if it means the same thing as shouting '" Fire" in a crowded theater, ie...ignorant protesting with killed persons involved.\nBut where do we end the censorship?  In India we could never even look right or left, heck they worship everything there don't they? Air, frogs, matchsticks?
1078034
It started around WW2 actually.  There are some propaganda cartoons out there on the net that would make anyone blush.
98963
I wouild say, "I am sorry that you have taken offense to this cartoon, but sometimes this is the price we must pay for a free press and free speech.  The main point is, sir, that in a free and open society if you are tolerant of what you interpret as a slur on your religion, other groups will be tolerant of your perceived slur on their religion.  Tolerance is the key.  If you find this impossible, you cannot expect Jews to tolerate a Muslim religious leader calling Judiasm a 'gutter religion.'"
995570
they're a foreign cartoon, does it matter?
102401
The insensitive cartoonists have a right to print it.  The muslims have a right to protest it.  I wish people would show a little more repsect towards other people and not try to deliberately offend them.  I am not muslim and have no respect for their religion. But as one human being to another, i respect their right to believe it and would not make a mockery of something that may be sacred to them.  I would excpect the same respect.
91820
Do you think it's right for the Muslim world to blame the US for Danish cartoons?
146876
Frankly, I'm not. I still don't quite understand why\neffigies of our leaders and the American and various\nEuropean flags can be burned without consequence,\nanti-Semitic and -Christian cartoons can be drawn in\nMuslim newspapers, and jihad can be declared on\nChristianity but as soon as a Danish newspaper\nexercises their freedom from censorship all hell\nbrakes loose. Guess what! That was done in THEIR OWN\ncountry--a European country that (I'm going out on a\nlimb on this one) is predominantly Christian. There\nare no rules about it--that I am aware of. Countries\nthat are predominantly Muslim have their own\ntraditions and rules that all foreigners must follow\nrespectfully within their borders. Countries, such as\nthe United States have traditions too. Guess what! We\nmodify these traditions so that we don't step on the\ntoes of foreigners who would raise hell if we tried to\ndo the same within their land.\n\nMY responses to some comments that were made...\n\nTo: patrick_mont:\n\nWatch what I do???\n\nOr what, you're gonna bomb me? That's exactly the\nproblem. Whatever your stand is on the war, I think\nthat most can agree that the "tradition" that we were\nattempting to change in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN was the\nremoval of people that brought pain and suffering to\ntheir own kind and not a change of Islamic faith or\ntradition. The pain continues because extremists\ncontinue to push on and apparently misunderstand our\npurpose for being there--much like you do.\n\nTo: msaelshamy:\n\nYes, I am a Christian and very honestly, no I would\nnot be upset by a cartoon depicting a Christian\nreligious figure. Maybe it's because I'm a bad person\nand only go to church on Christmas Eve, who knows.\nWhat I do know is that I have more important things to\nworry about than some cartoon or somebody calling me a\nstereotypical white male. Wait, isn't that\nstereotyping ME? Who cares. Freedom of speech does not\nallow one to incite violence or induce panic. It does\nallow one to express an opinion on just about\nanything, including religion. It doesn't happen in the\npress for fear of losing one's job or reprisals by the\noffended party. The cartoon is a sign of protest\nagainst Muslims using their religion as an excuse to\nmurder non-muslims (In response to the person who told\nme that burning the American flag was in response to\nAmerican Foreign policy). If fanatical Muslims did not\nwant violence associated with the Prophet, they have\ngone about doing it the wrong way by citing their\nreligion as the reason for their actions. I've seen\nthe videos. What person in their right mind yells "God\nis great!" while severing someone's head or detonating\na bomb?\n\nADDITION ON 2/6/06\n\nThe situation continues to get worse as Muslim\nprotests continue to grow increasingly violent. People\nhave died. Buildings have been set ablaze. This is\nover a cartoon. This is the work of not a just few\nreligious fanatics, but of scores of Muslims who\ndenounce the cartoon of the Prophet. A CARTOON! How\nabout rising up when an innocent Westerner (aid\nworker, member of the press, etc) is beheaded or your\nown people (Muslims) are blown up in a crowded market\nor at a wedding by a devout follower of Islam?\n\nADDITION ON 2/7/06\nWHAT EXCUSES ISLAMIC HATRED? BY TIM RUTTEN OF THE LA\nTIMES\n(Excerpts) 2/7/06\n\n"By last week, Danes faced not only violent protests\nin Islamic streets but also mounting demands from\ngovernments in the Middle East and elsewhere that the\ndo something to the newspaper."\n\n"All this would be slightly more edifying if it didn't\nreflect the destructive, dangerous double standard\nthat Western nations routinely observe when it comes\nto the government-controlled media in Islamic states.\nThere, the media are routinely rife with the vilest\nsort of hate directed at Jews and, less often,\nChristians."\n\n"If you want to see the cont
1140583
That made me laugh!  It's true. Well, probably He did and someone burned it all.\n\nI think He knew it would be worse if His words got mucked around with. Better to let the others words get mistranslated and retold wrong.
84016
-From the source quoted below...\n\n"Controversy over the publication of images depicting Mohammed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten has erupted into an international furor. While Muslims worldwide are calling for a boycott of Denmark and any other nation whose press reprints the cartoons, Europeans are trying to stand up for Western principles of freedom of speech and not cave in to self-censorship in the name of multiculturalism and fear."\n\n"While the debate rages, an important point has been overlooked: despite the Islamic prohibition against depicting Mohammed under any circumstances, hundreds of paintings, drawings and other images of Mohammed have been created over the centuries, with nary a word of complaint from the Muslim world. The recent cartoons in Jyllands-Posten are nothing new; it's just that no other images of Mohammed have ever been so widely publicized. "\n\n<snip>\n\nIt's also hypothsised that the situation was inflamed by the addition of 3 images that were NOT printed by the Danish newspaper.\n\n"Yet when a delegation of Danish imams went to the Middle East to discuss the issue of the cartoons with senior officials and prominent Islamic scholars, the imams openly distributed a booklet that showed 15 images -- not only the original 12 cartoons, but three fraudulent anti-Mohammed depictions that were much more offensive than the ones published in Denmark. It is now thought that these three bonus images are what ignited the outrage in the Muslim world. The newspaper Ekstra Bladet obtained a copy of the booklet and presented the three offensive images on its Web site (though not in an easy-to-find place). All look like low-quality photocopies."\n\nIt comes down to a clash of cultures and an intolerance of world views. Perhaps with a little provocation thrown in. I can't explain the level of violence though. Seems pretty extreme.
148769
Muslims have a rule that bans painting any picture of Islam holy men and a caricature of Islam prophet surely brings anger to Muslims so the question is why a danish newspaper has published such a debatable thing.\nI think at the moment we need peace not fights.