Page 1 of 47 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 933
Like Tree443Likes

Thread: A rare case of a journalist making sense on islamic terrorism...

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,490

    A rare case of a journalist making sense on islamic terrorism...

    The Blame for the Charlie Hebdo Murders - The New Yorker


    ....politics as religion, religion as politics. “Allahu Akbar!” the killers shouted in the street outside Charlie Hebdo. They, at any rate, know what they’re about....


    Edit, one more:

    How Terrorism Won*|*Ali A. Rizvi



    Add to this the rest of the major news networks in the United States: ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox all said they will not show the cartoons for which 12 innocent people were murdered in cold blood this week.There you have it. The United States is now living under Islamist blasphemy laws.

    These are the Sharia-driven blasphemy laws that terrorists violently and effectively implemented in Paris on January 7. And most Western mainstream media outlets are obediently complying with them.

    In his statement, President Obama hailed America's commitment to free speech, andreferred to the terrorists as "cowardly."
    Unfortunately, he had it the other way around. News outlets covering this story without showing the cartoons aren't curbing terrorism -- they're victims of it.
    Last edited by kuhio; 10th January 2015 at 16:04.
    Dkdude, billpay and tnlawyer like this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,238
    It will keep happening until Muslim people, the every day regular folk, come out and say 'not in my name'. When you listen to them interviewed you hear almost all of them say that Islam is a religion of peace but then they go on to say that those cartoons shouldn't have been published or that book shouldn't have been written and thereby justifying what has happened.

    Their mindset is not tolerant, inclusive or curious and that passage quoted above, politics as religion, religion as politics, is spot on.
    Petter likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Bill Maher can have my say on this....

    Steve@thaib, Dkdude and junkhouse like this.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Freedom of speech is not black and white. It is not to say it all or to say nothing at all. You have to take other people's feelings into consideration.

    When the news stations will not show certain cartoons, you cannot say that The United States is now living under Islamist blasphemy laws, just as well as The United States is not living under Black Power laws when news stations does not use the N-word.

    Ignoring other people's feelings when exercising your free speech have ramifications. Be it the risk of terror when drawing cartoons of Muhammad, the risk of loosing your job and career when using the N-word, or the risk of getting a good beating when calling a Hells Angel member a pussy. In the perfect world, you shouldn't risk either, but that is not the world we are living in.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,238
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    Freedom of speech is not black and white. It is not to say it all or to say nothing at all. You have to take other people's feelings into consideration.
    Agree with that completely. It shouldn't be seen as ok to mock somebody else's religion ( or disability/culture/sexual preferance ) but, of course, most people won't see it as ok to slaughter you at work for calling them a pussy.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Pablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,234
    Fcuk 'em if they can't take a joke!
    Steve@thaib and tnlawyer like this.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    103
    When the news stations will not show certain cartoons, you cannot say that The United States is now living under Islamist blasphemy laws, just as well as The United States is not living under Black Power laws when news stations does not use the N-word.
    The problem with the US media is that most of all Americans have never heard of Charlie Hebdo, or what they are about. And now that people have been killed because of it, it is highly relevant to show them. The terrorists have made the drawing relevant.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Dkdude View Post
    The problem with the US media is that most of all Americans have never heard of Charlie Hebdo, or what they are about. And now that people have been killed because of it, it is highly relevant to show them. The terrorists have made the drawing relevant.
    Yes, it would have been relevant to show them. Using the N-word may also be relevant in some situations.

    The Americans are very fragile regarding the N-word, so they should be the last to complaint when somebody are refraining from showing the cartoons. I am not sure where I stand personally, whether a news organization should show them or not. But it is clearly double standards when an American demands them shown, while not accepting the use of the N-word.
    Dkdude likes this.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,238
    It's fair to say that Americans get the concept of reedom of speech though. They may not want to use inflammatory words but they would surely recognise the right to use those words and not be killed for their use.

    Americans may be a lot of things but they are definitely defenders of free speech and democracy.

  10. #10
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve@thaib View Post
    ....It shouldn't be seen as ok to mock somebody else's religion.....
    some of the greatest artworks in the world...paintings, poetry, novels, plays etc etc have had at their core a resilience against taking the word of religious zealots from any nomination or creed as fact and showing it in the light of what it actually is...fabrication...and fabrication with the intent to hold sway over and to influence others..have them carry out the most heinous acts...and all in the name of whichever prophet/god/saviour you wish to insert

    To give up the right to do this because zealots choose to kill those who point out the fabrications and lies of those who they have been indoctrinated by is to give up on civilized society
    Last edited by nelsonone; 10th January 2015 at 19:40.
    Pablo and soupdragon like this.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    Freedom of speech is not black and white. It is not to say it all or to say nothing at all. You have to take other people's feelings into consideration.

    When the news stations will not show certain cartoons, you cannot say that The United States is now living under Islamist blasphemy laws, just as well as The United States is not living under Black Power laws when news stations does not use the N-word.

    Ignoring other people's feelings when exercising your free speech have ramifications. Be it the risk of terror when drawing cartoons of Muhammad, the risk of loosing your job and career when using the N-word, or the risk of getting a good beating when calling a Hells Angel member a pussy. In the perfect world, you shouldn't risk either, but that is not the world we are living in.
    This is a version of the "wearing a short skirt is really just asking to be raped" argument.

    As in that case, it is invalid.
    Dkdude likes this.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by kuhio View Post
    This is a version of the "wearing a short skirt is really just asking to be raped" argument.

    As in that case, it is invalid.
    So, you have no problem using the N-word?

  13. #13
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    THIS.....from the head of Hezbollah....and he's absolutely right



    Hezbollah Chief Nasrallah: Extremists Harm Islam More Than Cartoons




    BEIRUT (AP) — The leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah group says Islamic extremists have insulted Islam and the Prophet Muhammad more than those who published satirical cartoons mocking the religion.

    Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah did not directly mention the Paris attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead, but he said Islamic extremists who behead and slaughter people — a reference to the IS group's rampages in Iraq and Syria — have done more harm to Islam than anyone else in history.

    Nasrallah spoke Friday via video link to supporters gathered in southern Beirut.

    Nasrallah's Shiite group is fighting in Syria alongside President Bashar Assad.

    His remarks are in stark contrast to those of Sunni militants from the IS group and al-Qaida who have called for attacks on Western countries.
    Waharoa likes this.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve@thaib View Post
    It shouldn't be seen as ok to mock somebody else's religion
    This statement is exactly the same as saying "it shouldn't be ok to mock somebody else's political views."

    Religious ideas are just ideas, same as any other idea. They are something you choose.

    The conflation of criticism of religion with racism/bigotry is a subtle and now a days all to common nasty insinuation that needs to be met head on.

    Bad ideas, religious or otherwise, should be treated with ridicule and contempt, and I claim that right.
    Dkdude, nelsonone and bobdickgus like this.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,238
    Quote Originally Posted by nelsonone View Post
    some of the greatest artworks in the world...paintings, poetry, novels, plays etc etc have had at their core a resilience against taking the word of religious zealots from any nomination or creed as fact and showing it in the light of what it actually is...fabrication...and fabrication with the intent to hold sway over and to influence others..have them carry out the most heinous acts...and all in the name of whichever prophet/god/saviour you wish to insert

    To give up the right to do this because zealots choose to kill those who point out the fabrications and lies of those who they have been indoctrinated by is to give up on civilized society
    Bit unfair to snip part of a sentence, it loses context.

    I don't want to give up that right but in a tolerant society, ours, we should allow people the freedom to believe what they want to and, in return, those people should allow the rest of us the freedom to not believe. Works pretty well with Anglicans and Catholics over here.

    We shouldn't, in my opinion, take the piss out of people's religion any more than we should take the piss out of people's disability/sexual preference etc. in order to prove the point about free speech.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,238
    Quote Originally Posted by kuhio View Post
    This statement is exactly the same as saying "it shouldn't be ok to mock somebody else's political views."

    Religious ideas are just ideas, same as any other idea. They are something you choose.

    The conflation of criticism of religion with racism/bigotry is a subtle and now a days all to common nasty insinuation that needs to be met head on.

    Bad ideas, religious or otherwise, should be treated with ridicule and contempt, and I claim that right.
    I wouldn't say you don't have the right to at all. I just don't see the need to. We used to mock people for being black, I don't see the need to do that either.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    So, you have no problem using the N-word?
    You are making the mistake conflating and attack on someones religion as the same as an attack on their race, which it clearly is not as I pointed out in my last post.

    That said, even if it were the same, which it is not, it matters little.

    If by "no problem" you mean that I would not want to see it banned, yes I have no problem.

    I prefer to know who does and does not hold bigoted views. If they are not allowed to express those views it is pretty hard to tell.

    Furthermore, should someone use the N-word, and is then physically attacked. I would demand that the one who goes to jail is the one that did the physical attacking not the other way around.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve@thaib View Post
    I wouldn't say you don't have the right to at all. I just don't see the need to. We used to mock people for being black, I don't see the need to do that either.
    How can you say you "don't see a need" for criticism of religious views? The sole reason for the death of 12 people that occurred a few days ago was the religious views of the perpetrators. Not deserving of criticism?

    On the false analogy of comparing criticism of religion to racism, once again:

    Your argument assumes that holding specific views about the nature of the universe and "being black" are the same thing. They are not.

    Secondly, even in the case of expressing racism, as I mentioned above, at a minimum, allowing people to express those ideas allows you to identify racists. Banning the use of racist language does nothing to stop racists from holding their views. Subsequent criticism of someone who expresses their racist views does.
    Dkdude likes this.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by kuhio View Post
    You are making the mistake conflating and attack on someones religion as the same as an attack on their race, which it clearly is not as I pointed out in my last post.

    That said, even if it were the same, which it is not, it matters little.
    You may think it is different, believing you should be able to make fun of Muhammad but that using the N-word is much worse. The Muslim fanatics may think it is different, believing it is o.k. to use the N-word, but that making fun of Muhammad is much worse. It really isn't that different.

    I wish we could all make fun of each other and of holy icons and that no one would take it personally. And I wish we could use the N-word and that no one would take it personally. We can make fun of the politicians, Jews, and Christians to a much larger degree, it would be nice if it was like that with Muhammad and the N-word too.

    Quote Originally Posted by kuhio View Post
    Furthermore, should someone use the N-word, and is then physically attacked. I would demand that the one who goes to jail is the one that did the physical attacking not the other way around.
    I do not disagree with you. I am all for freedom of speech and against violence, but we also need to respect each other. Please note that I have written "N-word" instead of using the real word. That is because I am respecting the Americans here. In Europe, it is in many places looked upon as silly that you cannot say that word, as it does not have the same bad history for us.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    Freedom of speech is not black and white. It is not to say it all or to say nothing at all. You have to take other people's feelings into consideration.

    When the news stations will not show certain cartoons, you cannot say that The United States is now living under Islamist blasphemy laws, just as well as The United States is not living under Black Power laws when news stations does not use the N-word.

    Ignoring other people's feelings when exercising your free speech have ramifications. Be it the risk of terror when drawing cartoons of Muhammad, the risk of loosing your job and career when using the N-word, or the risk of getting a good beating when calling a Hells Angel member a pussy. In the perfect world, you shouldn't risk either, but that is not the world we are living in.
    There is not one reason, opinion or religion that justifies killing, less murdering, for it.

Page 1 of 47 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •