Muhammed drawings and free speech

[questor]

it's a puzzlement. some on the site have given Islam a pass on terrorism because, after all, only a million or so have engaged in violent acts. only

30,000 or so Iraqis have been killed by their own kind, so actually we are supposed to think that Islam is a peaceful religion and most Muslims want peace, although they haven't shown much effort in the behalf of peace.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, with a billion practitioners.

who are the Muslims? i have heard the prisoners in our federal prisons are turning to Islam, why do you think that is true? who are the Muslims? are they really peace-loving, or are they imbued with the jihad mentality taught to them in the madrassas by their militant Imams? are they willing to coexist with others in peace, or are the majority overt or closet anti Semites and

anti Westerners waiting for their next chance at knocking off a few thousand

infidels? when you look at the middle east, where are the voices of reason?

which nations are active in promoting reason and peace? i would say none.

the only ones cooperating with us do so to save their own dictatorship.

[Racoon]

Valid points Questor.

 

Helps if you space paragraphs.. :hihi:

 

I don't want eye-glasses already :)

 

That goes for CraigD!!!

[infamous]

it's a puzzlement. some on the site have given Islam a pass on terrorism because, after all, only a million or so have engaged in violent acts. only

30,000 or so Iraqis have been killed by their own kind, so actually we are supposed to think that Islam is a peaceful religion and most Muslims want peace, although they haven't shown much effort in the behalf of peace.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, with a billion practitioners.

who are the Muslims? i have heard the prisoners in our federal prisons are turning to Islam, why do you think that is true? who are the Muslims? are they really peace-loving, or are they imbued with the jihad mentality taught to them in the madrassas by their militant Imams? are they willing to coexist with others in peace, or are the majority overt or closet anti Semites and

anti Westerners waiting for their next chance at knocking off a few thousand

infidels? when you look at the middle east, where are the voices of reason?

which nations are active in promoting reason and peace? i would say none.

the only ones cooperating with us do so to save their own dictatorship.

Exactly questor; The answers to your questions should reveal to everyone where this conflict is taking us. To quote Lincoln: "I fear the war is forced upon us".................Infy

[TheBigDog]

The Revolutionists killed British troops. That was seen as terrorism.( by British)

They refused the laws and concepts of mother Britian, and killed over it. (even recruited Indians to kill! )

 

The same as Easterners are refuting our Judeo-Christian pressures.

 

Terrorism can be defined quickly as: "The use of terror and intimidation to gain one's political objective"

 

Contrarily BigDog, the tea party was Intimidation to British Tea merchants, saying 'We will not be a subject of your politics and taxes'.

 

I am not advocating killing by any means.

But objectively 'Racoon' sees an Al-Queda agent as a terrorist, while 'Sabib Salir' in Yemen sees them as fighting the oppresion!

Get my drift?

Equivocating the Boston Tea Party to a terrorist act is just plain wrong. There was no killing in the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence, aside some toward citizens who tried to steal some of the spilled tea and make off with it who got a few knocks. In fact Wikipedia describes "The whole event was remarkably quiet and peaceful."

 

The US revolution was against an oppressive monarchy that was using hard tactics to keep the colonies in line. The grievances against the crown were outlined very nicely in The Declaration of Independence. In the time preceding the declaration there were acts of rebellion against the crown pointed at officers of the British government, not at citizens. There is a sharp contrast between those acts and the acts of terrorists that you would associate with those true historic freedom fighters.

 

In fact, after the Boston Massacre when British troops fired point blank into a crowd of protesters, none other that John Adams acted as defense attorney for the soldiers, with 6 being acquitted, and 2 found guilty. The 2 guilty men were branded and set free. Show the equal of that in the so called Islamic freedom fighters of today?

 

So, please... pretty please... refrain from justifying terrorism in any way shape or form by equivocating them with historical figures who recognized who their true oppressors were, spent years battling within the system to find peaceful resolution to grievances, and used violence only when all other options for freedom had been exhausted. And when they used violence, they used it against the army of their enemy, not random innocent civilians.

 

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

Buffy kindly mentioned libel and slander for me.One of these, I can't remember which 'cause I'm less familiar with British/American legaleese, doesn't require proving even economic loss.

 

Well, British libel laws are different, but in American law, libel/slander is a matter of fact and not of intent. I can call you all the nasty names I want, and that's fine, but as soon as I say something that's demonstratbly false such as "You eat babies." Then I've crossed into libel. And no matter how nasty I am about it, as long as it's true - I can say it. And if it's a matter of opinion - so and so is an a-hole - then it's not subject to libel laws.

 

Free speech, BTW, has nothing to do with kiddie porn. Child pornography is a clear harm to someone - a child. Anyone who argues that kiddie porn doesn't hurt the children depicted in it? Well, they have a pretty flimsy grasp on reality.

 

TFS

[TheBigDog]

it's a puzzlement. some on the site have given Islam a pass on terrorism because, after all, only a million or so have engaged in violent acts. only

30,000 or so Iraqis have been killed by their own kind, so actually we are supposed to think that Islam is a peaceful religion and most Muslims want peace, although they haven't shown much effort in the behalf of peace.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, with a billion practitioners.

who are the Muslims? i have heard the prisoners in our federal prisons are turning to Islam, why do you think that is true? who are the Muslims? are they really peace-loving, or are they imbued with the jihad mentality taught to them in the madrassas by their militant Imams? are they willing to coexist with others in peace, or are the majority overt or closet anti Semites and

anti Westerners waiting for their next chance at knocking off a few thousand

infidels? when you look at the middle east, where are the voices of reason?

which nations are active in promoting reason and peace? i would say none.

the only ones cooperating with us do so to save their own dictatorship.

questor (Offline)

Explaining

Rep Power: 18

 

 

 

Posts: 666

Join Date: Jul 2005

 

Post again quick questor! Don't let anyone associate these cartoons with the Rapture!

 

Bill

[Racoon]

OK bigdog... agreed Tea Party wasn't exactly full of blood..

But is was a terrorist act like the ELF's burning of a SUV sales Lot! :hihi:

 

It was the impetus that began revolutionary war!

Don't get hung up on Boston Tea Party, peaceful activism!

 

It was malicious destruction and antagonistic blow at Britains stranglehold on Politics and Economic control~~

 

War consequently ensued..

 

Those guys could have been viewed as terrorists by todays standards. They didn't have Nerve Gas or airplanes to fly into builings at the time..

 

Thats exactly what terrorists are trying to do now! Just different time and technology..

 

 

What were they thinking in the Western World Controling Britain at that time??

 

"Damn those pesky revolutionists. Lets squash em'"

like our thinking is against modern terrorists...

 

Same Paradigm... Different context...

 

We can agree to disagree on this topic.

I did read your posts BigDog, and yes they do make sense..

 

I suppose our government were terrorists when they Randomly killed millions of Indians! and stole all their land, and killed all their Buffalo, and purposely spread Small Pox!

[C1ay]

The Boston Tea Partiers were "terrorists" by definition.

I disagree. Terrorists, by definition, use terror as a tactic to get their way. While the Boston Tea Partiers did cause property damage they were not doing so to specifically cause or use terror as a tactic. It was not their intent to cause others to fear for their life if they did not get their way.

[Racoon]

Ok! quit bashing my tea party! :hihi:

It was "intimidation" which IS part of the definition of Terrorism! :hihi:

Terrorism doesnt only mean killing. Look at dictionary .

 

US government Did terrorize Indians :hihi:

Killing Randomly and purposely spreading Small Pox.

 

I'm not on terrorists side. Just trying to be Objective...

 

Just that we need to understand that We accuse these guys of being terrorists, BUT in THEIR eyes, they view US as the terrorists..

like I said before "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter"

 

We need to sweep off our porch first.

 

Killing is just plain wrong. US government isn't so Pure and Holy!!!

[C1ay]

Ok! quit bashing my tea party! :hihi:

It was "intimidation" which IS part of the definition of Terrorism! :hihi:

I think it was just more rebellious vandalism than an intent to induce terror.

 

US government Did terrorize Indians :hihi:

Killing Randomly and purposely spreading Small Pox.

 

Killing is just plain wrong. US government isn't so Pure and Holy!!!

No disagreement there. The U.S. screwed the Indians over good. In som ways it is plenty evil as well.

[Racoon]

Agreed Clay :hihi:

 

I think we all use the term "Terrorism" a little loosely, and that it can mean a lot of different things to different people..

 

What about ELF, when they "torched" SUV dealership and housing Developments.? We (our media) call that "terrorism" and the Earth Liberators a terrorist group!

 

Wouldn't that just be malicious/rebellious vandalism?

[C1ay]

What about ELF, when they "torched" SUV dealership and housing Developments.? We (our media) call that "terrorism" and the Earth Liberators a terrorist group!

 

Wouldn't that just be malicious/rebellious vandalism?

Yep, I don't think it was ELF's intent to induce the feeling of terror. IMO, terror is a required element of terrorism.

[Racoon]

Yes Clay..

But It might have induced terror in the heart of the Building Contractor!

Or the Salesmen/Owner of the dealership. Causing them to feel fear for their livelihood or even their physical safety...

 

I can't fault your logic :hihi:

 

I still say Terrorism has a loose meaning, because the word is used so often now.

[TheBigDog]

Yes Clay..

But It might have induced terror in the heart of the Building Contractor!

Or the Salesmen/Owner of the dealership.

 

I can't fault your logic :hihi:

 

I still say Terrorism has a loose meaning, because the word is used so often now.

I agree with your last point Racoon. We wter down the meaning of terrorism every time we take somme two bit vandall and associate them with the worst villians on the planet. It makes the acts of vandallism seem worse than they really are to some. It can also have the effect of making the worst villians seem "not so bad". The press needs to get better at calling things what they are.

 

Bill

[Racoon]

Good..

 

Lets all hold hands and sing 'Kumbayah'!! :hihi:

[TheBigDog]

Good..

 

Lets all hold hands and sing 'Kumbayah'!! :hihi:

Ku*****h?!? Racoon, In my native land that is an insult to our most sacred principles! Just for that I am locking the lids on my garbage cans!

 

Bill

[IrishEyes]

Three days later, and I'm finally caught up with this thread.

 

My goodness, you guys have said a lot, and many times over, in fact.

Would you believe that when I first heard about this on the radio, I thought it was a joke, and called nemo laughing? When he told me it was serious, I was in shock. I mean, come on... people wanting to kill the Danes and Norwegians? Give me a break!

 

Since reaing through this thread, I have had many new insights on this situation. I have to say, I fall somewhere between Q and T. I firmly believe in freedom of the press. I do, homever, also firmly believe in accepting responsibility for your own actions. I do NOT agree with the cartoons being published, I think it was in poor taste, and that the reactions should have been expected to some degree.

 

Out of all of the people participating here, I really like what B had to say the most. Of course, that crazy South African is one of my favorite people to read, so that shouldn't surprise any of you.

 

And "Kumbaya"??? Come on, now. At least make it something fun...like "We Shall Overcome". :hihi: