Freedom of Speech.

[capsulecorpjx]

The European media is recieving flak from some fanatic Muslims because of cartoons that were published that made fun of Mohammed. In response, there has been cases of riots, threats and violence. The Dutch government has even been asked to apologize for the newspaper that published the cartoons, a ridiculous request since the government has no ownership over free press.

This is just an example of extreme overreaction.

Fanatics (of all idealogies) need to realize that they do not have the right to NOT be offended.

I see this in many people. They get angry and overreact when something offends them. The proper thing to do when you're offended is to either respond to it with your own free speech, or tune it out.

Instead, the fanatics try to SHUT DOWN someone else's free speech, either through violent action, threats or economic coercion (such as pressuring the advertisers of a media to take the offending content off).

I'm sick of it. I hope the Europeans and the Dutch media don't back down.

[demotivater]

And the Muslim protestors in London exercising their right to free speech:

The protesters held placards, one declaring: "Behead the one who insults the prophet." Another said: "Free speech go to hell."
I say give in to their demands and run them all over with tanks.

[NoteMe]

The musslims in Norway seems to be be pretty pissed about it. And I can understand it. But it doesn't seem like they want to do any sort of violence. Which is good. But I think the biggest problem here is that there is a lack of communication here. Denmark first printed them before christmas, then they did it now, and some small christian magazine printed the same pictures the day after. But it is only like 500 people who get that magazine. but now they think all around the world that that what we do in Norway. And we don't care, and thats scary. But I don't get why 4.500.000 should appologize for something 500 people did, and we are even allowed to do it. They are of course allowed to be mad, and call us stuff, thats their freedom of speach. But storming the ambassies and throw bombs thats a bit too much.



- ØØ -

[penagate]

Don't forget that freedom of speech does not exist in many countries. Many people think they have a right to it, maybe because it is a "buzzword" in the US. But, there's not even any such ruling in Australia... and we are supposed to be fairly democratic. I don't know about the Netherlands specifically, but take another recent, well publicised example - Google's Chinese web service (www.google.cn). They censor the results in accordance with Chinese law, and many of us think that that is wrong, but whatever we think of it, it's just the way it is there. Most of third world countries are worse than that... so those of you that truly do have a right to free speech, should be very grateful..

[Mosabama]

Guys ...

The islamic countries ( People) are not willing to buy products from denmark ... and thats also ... FREE OF ACT ....

they say that they are free to miss with aholly person like mohammed ... well ok ... but arnt muslims free not to buy their products ?????!!!!!

and now because of that ... (not buying their products ) they say that they will burn the holly book of islam infront of all the people in denmark ...

and they call them selves civilized ... !!!!

every body has about idea about muslims ... they think that they are teroreists ... not knowing that muslims believe in jesus as a prophet from god ... and muslims beleive in every holy person in christianity ... but the bad thing is the media ... and when when some bad muslims does something bad ... its said that islam is bad .. and thats wrong ...

when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN ... and thats wrong ... and I am sure if you know islam very well you would change all your thoughts ...

[grilkip]

The AEL (Arab European League, a political organisation) has posted some anti-semitic pictures on their website in 'retaliation'.

[Wokawidget]

when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN ... and thats wrong ... and I am sure if you know islam very well you would change all your thoughts ...
Sorry, no I don't. I think of turbans, mosques and religeous studies we did years back at school...which I hated and much prefered wood work and science, but that's a different matter :D

[Wokawidget]

What you have to realise here is that even though this type of thing is in the media loads, it's only a small minority of "fanatics", who are causing all the trouble. Anyone with an IQ slightly higher than a delapidated slug can see that.

I was forced to pray to God when I was at school even though I wasn't religeous and it wasn't even a religeous school, this built up a great hatred inside of me for Christianity and all religions. You believe in one thing, soemone else believes in something else...fair enough, I have no problem with that...but please don't force your beliefs on me. Which is what's happening here.

Then this happens:

http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.php?p=2342511#post2342511

You also have to take this out of context. This is not about religion, well it is and it isn't. All this is being done "in the name of religion", but it's exactly the same as animal protestors who petrol bomb scientists houses and give them, and their families, death threats. Yes, you have your views, yes you're allowed to demonstate and protest (peacefully), but you will ALWAYS get some stupid retards, and I choose my words carefully there, who take it toooooo damn far! These people are the deep rooted problem in society, and NOT the causes they fight and murder for.

I once close friend of mine is an antiwar, anti globalisation person. He organises protests etc. Each to their own. We clearly had very different views on the subjects, but got along just fine. Then a few yearss ago, they went down to London and protested again McDonalds and smashed the place up (u may have seen it on the news)...I lost ALL respect for him then. Don't see him much now.

Woka

[Shaggy Hiker]

Rage and power make a bad combination.

[Wokawidget]

Where does power come into this?

I could go and protest in front of my local newsagents (tabac/convenience store) because they don't sell my favorite choccy bar. I could then whip out one of my home made specials and torch the place. Who's gonna stop me?

(this is clearly wrong and I'd get banged up for a long time)

But, my point is, if I did the above it doesn't mean I have power, it means I am a mentalist who needs removing from society.

Or are you refering to power in numbers?
If this is the case then say 10 Million people complain about something, ie this cartoon, then we should change the laws to not allow this to happen? But what if 100 million complained about freedom of speech. Clearly the 100 million have spoken, which far out ways the 10 million which are now in the minority...does it not?

Woka

[Wokawidget]

I have a huge chip on my shoulder about his whole "doing things in the name of something else" situations.

I remember, and this is going back 15 years or something like that, that this family who came to live in the UK from Africa a think it was, who were religeous (but not one of the main religions) complained that their son was not allowed to wear a knife strapped to his leg while AT SCHOOL!!! This was a cerimonial knife for some reason, but still a knife (dagger if you wish) non the less. The family kicked up a right fuss saying that the English state and school were snubbing their religion. They weren't happy at all.

The school refused to accept this, and he had to go to school minus the knife.

Woka

[demotivater]

but arnt muslims free not to buy their products ?????!!!!!

They are also free to leave the country they chose to immigrate to

every body has about idea about muslims ... they think that they are teroreists ... not knowing that muslims believe in jesus as a prophet from god
Obviously, not all Muslims are terrorists. However, the most outspoken Imams preach hatred and "death to infidels"; that cannot be denied. When the "good" Muslims stand up against the current ruling class of Muslims, then perhaps we'll see a change in the attitude of non-Muslims. Until then, it's very clear how the preachings of Mohamed are being interpereted and taught throughout the Muslim world.
... and muslims beleive in every holy person in christianity ...
Granted. However, those who do not convert to Islam are branded infidels, and we all know the fate that awaits an infidel. There are no two ways in Islam, despite who they recognize as a prophet or not. If you do not convert to Islam, you are an infidel and will be dealt with accordingly. The goal of the current brand of Islam, by their own admission, is to live in a Muslim world, destroying those who do not convert.

when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN ... and thats wrong ... and I am sure if you know islam very well you would change all your thoughts ...
Bin Laden is held in high regard throughout the Muslim world. You can't dispute that fact. He is the Muslim legend that stood up to the western infidels.

It's one thing to claim the hatred is a small minority of your religon, it's another to oppose your own oppressors and make it stop. I see throngs of Muslims chanting death to the west, and have seen only a small handful opposing that mantra. Media bias is a very real thing, but even the Arab media (and I realize not all Muslims are Arab, but I'm speaking to what I've seen) are not willing to condemn and defy the rhetoric of the "death to infidels" preachings of the leading Imams. Until good Muslims get off their duffs and direct their own futures, we will hunt down and kill those that endeavor to destroy our way of life.

[NoteMe]

Hehheehe..this is just the most stupdid conflict ever. Norwegian and Danish ambassies are burning all over the world, and back home right side/hand (or what ever it is called) extremists are threatening to kill the muslims in Norway...this is just getting to stupid. Looks like everyone just take the first person they see and blame it. It is totaly out of controll.



- ØØ -

[big blue alien]

They are also free to leave the country they chose to immigrate to
The problem is Muslims dont think in terms of countries, the traditionalists move to a country and segregate themselves and consider themselves to be totaly seperate from that country. I remeber in the Oldham riots a comunity leader saying on TV that the police should leave them and stay in their area

[Shaggy Hiker]

Where does power come into this?

Woka

Actually, I was thinking of power in terms of relative strengths at any given instant in time.

Suppose you were to come face to face with a nice big ol' grizzle bear. Perhaps this bear angered you, or you were angry about something else. In either case, punching the bear would be a truly stupid act. Regardless of how much anger you had in you, you have zero power relative to the force you oppose.

You could say the same about punching a truck, but unless the truck is moving, you aren't likely to do more than hurt your hand, so there is no particular cost to doing this.

In the current case, a group of people are taking actions against something because they have alot of anger (real or manufactured, it makes no real difference), and because they have power relative to their target at the time of the action, they act violently towards that target. However, in this case, they have little power outside of the instant of the action, and could end up suffering overall. Alternatively, the people taking the action could cause the larger group that they are a part of to suffer.

Violence in our society is almost never a case of a weak force taking on a stronger one out of principle. Violence is almost always done because of a perceived strength on the part of the entity (an individual or a group) perpetrating the violence.

The balance of power becomes the calculation. Conservatives tend to say that if the balance of power favors one side, then it is acceptable for that side to use force (using an argument of self-interest, get em before they get you, or other). Most spiritual leaders (JC, Gandhi, MLKJr) generally taught that if you have power you should NOT use force. Those who call themselves liberals fall into both camps on this issue.

However, once rage enters the equation, the ethics of use of force goes out the window. Violence always follows if the angry party perceives that they have significant power relative to their target. I know of no exception to this.

[penagate]

Please do not view these links if the images may cause offence. You know what is there and you have been warned.
I have decided to leave these links here so poeple can better understand what is causing all this serious tension in the world today. Without knowing what we're talking about poeple cannot participate in a fair debate.

Wokawidget, VBF Super Moderator





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/Mo_Cartoons.jpg

I've seen far more "offensive" ones about Chrstianity and no-one seems to complain.

[Pino]

I'm gonna go burn down the wikipedia head office now that cartoon anoys me....

mentallity? pre-dinasaur

[penagate]

The one thing I dislike most about all this is how the actions of a few extremists can (wrongly) reflect badly upon so many. Many innocent people suffer from discriminatory hate as a result of incidents like these.

Counter-action, well, it's knee-jerk at best, at worst it can be more harmful than the original acts themselves. We've all seen that.

[Wokawidget]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/Mo_Cartoons.jpg

I've seen far more "offensive" ones about Chrstianity and no-one seems to complain.
Hmmmmm...Is that the prophet? How can you tell??? :confused:
Just looks like a characture of a middle eastern person to me, just like the English people are portrayed in cartoons wearing bowler hats, black suits, carrying an umbrella and a cup of tea.

I don't think it's the fact the cartoons touch on a dodgy subject, suicide bombers and terrorists, that's caused the problem. It's the fact there is a picture of him at all that's annoyed people.

So if the paper had printed a picture of the prophet praying, then I still believe this would have caused offence to many people.

Wooka

[big blue alien]

Is that all it was? there must have been more, no ones that mad that they'll start all this trouble just cos of that. Some of them wernt romotelly ofensive and most of them didnt even say it was Muhammad

[Wokawidget]

Is that all it was?
Yes.

But the issue here is what isn't offensive to one person, is to another.

ie I don't have a problem with porn in the slightest...but MANY people do. But those people do not have the right to stop me looking at it if I wanted to. If they don't like it, they don't have to look at it. Simple.

What we cannot do is bow down to everyones issues, because then we simpley wouldn't leave the house as my hair, clothes, accent would no doubt offend someone somewhere.

Woka

[capsulecorpjx]

Guys ...

The islamic countries ( People) are not willing to buy products from denmark ... and thats also ... FREE OF ACT ....

they say that they are free to miss with aholly person like mohammed ... well ok ... but arnt muslims free not to buy their products ?????!!!!!

and now because of that ... (not buying their products ) they say that they will burn the holly book of islam infront of all the people in denmark ...

and they call them selves civilized ... !!!!

every body has about idea about muslims ... they think that they are teroreists ... not knowing that muslims believe in jesus as a prophet from god ... and muslims beleive in every holy person in christianity ... but the bad thing is the media ... and when when some bad muslims does something bad ... its said that islam is bad .. and thats wrong ...

when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN ... and thats wrong ... and I am sure if you know islam very well you would change all your thoughts ...

I didn't say economic coercion (boycotts etc.) is illegal, since it is a peron's choice. I'm just saying its wrong. The act of boycotting to coerce someone to not speak is wrong.

Besides in this case its ridiculous. You're boycotting the entire country for what one newspaper did. Blame by association is illogical. But practiced commonly.

[cilu]

I think relegion is the worst thing that happened to humanity. I don't mean faith. I mean religion. Most of all conflits have been caused by religion. There were so many crimes commited in the name of God, whether it's name was Yehova, Allah, Brahma, or any other. Christianity evolved to keep the pase with the times. It seems that Islam didn't. I've seen tens of cartoon about God, Jesus, angels, and a constellation of saints or religious figures. And even very bad taste cartoons (to use an euphemism). I never saw or heard of protests over them. People know to be tolerant, to forgive, to get it over, or to ignore. I think this is something Islam has to learn: tolerance, forgiveness. I'm not aware of Islam teachings, but every day I see the lack of tolerance, forgiveness or even love in its teachings. I think the teachings of a religions is best seen in it's most fervent practitioners. I've seen a picture with a muslim protester in London holding a board that said: "Behead those who think Islam is violent". I think that says it all about Islam. Religions should be about love and peace, not about hate and killings. With so many people willing to kill in the name of god, they would really run out of virgins in heavens, as one of the cartoons said.

I'm not trying to defend the cartoons. They are bad taste. Freedom of speach and expression does not give the right to offend. (BTW, the cartoons have just been published in a Romanian newspaper.) Freedom comes with strings. Your freedom ends when it affects the others. Freedom is about respect. Power is about forgiveness. Instead of burning embassies and killing priests (in Turkey) be best reaction of the Islam world would have been publishing something that offended the West, like what a newspaper from Iran did with cartoons about the Holocaust. I just saw one of them, with Hitler in bed with a girl saying "Write that down in your diary, Anne" (referring to Anne Frank). I'm currious to know the reaction of the west, since it's the same freedom of speach.

I think that the times of a major clash beween civilizations - and I especially have in mind the Christian world and the Islam world - is, unfortunatelly, inevitable because there are so many fanatics in this world. I think the dice have been thrown. And the pace of events in acelerating: Hamas, Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, offending cartoons causing large scale riots. So many in such a short time. May the gods work together to avoid it!

PS: if my thoughts offends anyone (though not my intention at all) I would really like to see a civilized answer to it...

[Shaggy Hiker]

PS: if my thoughts offends anyone (though not my intention at all) I would really like to see a civilized answer to it...

Sorry, can't do civilized, would you be willing to settle for insane? I think I could come up with something there.

You see, the whole concept of religeon was intended to distract people from reaching an understanding......that.....uhhhh....squid rule the world!!

Funny thing about that, once I started on that statement, practically any answer that was even halfway rational could have contained an element of truth. I had to veer into the absurd to keep from making sense.

[grilkip]

Pistols at dawn!

[capsulecorpjx]

I think relegion is the worst thing that happened to humanity. I don't mean faith. I mean religion...

WRONG. FAITH IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS.

Or more specifically blind faith. The ability not to question or laugh, or to hold a specific idea as taboo is the cause of all the world's pain.


Freedom of speach and expression does not give the right to offend.


You are so wrong. Freedom of Speech absolutely gives you the right to offend. I hear this alot, it is the reason why this world sucks. Because there are violent *******s who don't want to be offended, so instead of tuning it out or protesting peacfully, they turn violent or try to shut down what offends them.

[grilkip]

I am free to trow a can of gasoline in the fireplace, do I want to bear the consequences of that? No...

You can use freedom of speech to offend me, but you can be sure to have your arse kicked. That's how it works on a personal level, that's how it works on a global level.

If you offend people, don't cry when they react.

Also, I feel that when muslim nations decide to boycot western nations because of this, we should retaliate in the same way, cut them off and see how they like it.

Taking a principal stance only works in a perfect world.

[cilu]

Here are some great cartoons over the situation... http://www.cagle.com/news/Muhammad/main.asp

You are so wrong. Freedom of Speech absolutely gives you the right to offend.
I'm sorry, but you got it wrong. Freedom doesn't mean you can do anything you want. Freedom means you can do anything you want unless it affects, in a negative way, the others. That's why there are laws in this world. To tell you what are you free to do and what you are not.

You can use freedom of speech to offend me, but you can be sure to have your arse kicked.
I think it should be common sense restraining yourself from offfending the others. It just doesn't work to offend and then say: "hey, I'm exercising my freedom of speech".

Also, I feel that when muslim nations decide to boycot western nations because of this, we should retaliate in the same way, cut them off and see how they like it.
That could be a solution. Unfortunatelly that will only worsen the situation.

[big blue alien]

Also, I feel that when muslim nations decide to boycot western nations because of this, we should retaliate in the same way, cut them off and see how they like it.
Yeah great idea, lets cut off the biggest oil producers in the world. We need oil more than they need a few little western extras so that realy wouldnt work

You can use freedom of speech to offend me, but you can be sure to have your arse kicked.
The idea of free speach is anyone can say anything they want but anyone can contradict them. If someone offends you and you cant defend yourself VERBALY thats because their right

[grilkip]

Yeah great idea, lets cut off the biggest oil producers in the world. We need oil more than they need a few little western extras so that realy wouldnt workNot all muslim nations are oil producers. True we would have to be smart about that one.

The idea of free speach is anyone can say anything they want but anyone can contradict them. If someone offends you and you cant defend yourself VERBALY thats because their rightThat doesn't mean it won't happen. It's a reality not some idea in your head about what is right.

[yrwyddfa]

WRONG. FAITH IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS.That's not actually true if you only count mortality rates. More death has been caused by political, and land-greed than religion.

[big blue alien]

WRONG. FAITH IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS.
for a while i was gona say it didnt cause Aids but then i remembered that religion is stopping people in Africa useing condoms. yrwyddfa is right but religion is often used as an excuse, eg; the crusades

[capsulecorpjx]

That's not actually true if you only count mortality rates. More death has been caused by political, and land-greed than religion.

My fault for not being clear. I meant all blind faith. Of the political areas of blind faith, Communism and Facism are the biggest offenders.

Now I do agree, greed is a very big contender as well.

[zaza]

I read (in a newspaper, granted) that the chap who took these cartoons over to the Middle East to show his chums included a few extras, such as one depicting Mohammed as a pig, one showing him sodomising a child and a third I can't remember.

Don't know where he got them from, but apparently he's now a bit regretful, and claims that "he didn't mean to start so much trouble".


Hm.

[MasterBlaster]

Also, I feel that when muslim nations decide to boycot western nations because of this, we should retaliate in the same way, cut them off and see how they like it.

Bad idea. The sooner we use up all of their oil, the sooner we won't have to deal with them any more

[honeybee]

The European media is recieving flak from some fanatic Muslims because of cartoons that were published that made fun of Mohammed. In response, there has been cases of riots, threats and violence. The Dutch government has even been asked to apologize for the newspaper that published the cartoons, a ridiculous request since the government has no ownership over free press.

This is just an example of extreme overreaction.

Fanatics (of all idealogies) need to realize that they do not have the right to NOT be offended.

I see this in many people. They get angry and overreact when something offends them. The proper thing to do when you're offended is to either respond to it with your own free speech, or tune it out.

Instead, the fanatics try to SHUT DOWN someone else's free speech, either through violent action, threats or economic coercion (such as pressuring the advertisers of a media to take the offending content off).

I'm sick of it. I hope the Europeans and the Dutch media don't back down.

I don't get the point: I can understand when the first cartoons appeared in the Dutch media, they probably wanted to stress some other point. But once they realized the Muslims were taking offence to the cartoons, instead of containing it, the media went overboard and republished them, clearly to provoke the Muslims. This is not free speech, it's simply a wilful and malicious disregard towards a religion. Free speech is not irresponsible speech. And being an international community the media should foresee the consequences any particular piece of publication will have on the masses, and what it is trying to achieve. The reproduction of the cartoons was done only to incite further hatred from the Muslims and not to uphold the free speech. It was a misuse of the free speech.

.

[Valleysboy1978]

Free speech is just that, free. You can say what you want, when you want and to whom you want. However there will always be consequences, but never should you NOT be allowed to say something unless it contravenes with another law. A good example is the UK. We have freedom of speech and can say what we like. However, if we speak in a manner to incite racial hatred we can be put in prison in for that

[nemaroller]

Free speech is just that, free. You can say what you want, when you want and to whom you want. However there will always be consequences, but never should you NOT be allowed to say something unless it contravenes with another law. A good example is the UK. We have freedom of speech and can say what we like. However, if we speak in a manner to incite racial hatred we can be put in prison in for that

So if you declared your hated of the Irish to an Irishman - you could go to jail? How's that freedom of speech? I think you may be misinterpreting your laws.

[capsulecorpjx]

Free speech is just that, free. You can say what you want, when you want and to whom you want. However there will always be consequences, but never should you NOT be allowed to say something unless it contravenes with another law. A good example is the UK. We have freedom of speech and can say what we like. However, if we speak in a manner to incite racial hatred we can be put in prison in for that

Thats not Freedom of Speech.

Freedom of speech means I can go incite racial hatred without being put in Jail. I might get hazed and harassed for it, but the government won't jail me or shut me up. And if the people who are offended by what I say gets violent in their reaction (beyond words and protests), then THEY get to go to jail.

[FunkyDexter]

Thats not Freedom of Speech No, but it is how the principle is applied in British law. Basicaly, you have the legal right to say anything you like but then certain exceptions are applied. You're not allowed to incite racial hatred (which isn't the same as saying 'I hate Irishmen', it's more like saying 'you should hate Irishmen because...') or incite someone to commit a crime (e.g. inciting violence). Interestingly, the racial hatred bit doesn't apply to religions except the jews, who are considered a race for the purposes of that law. This is mainly for historical reasons but does create something of an anomoly which I can understand a muslim (or any other gentile) being a bit miffed at.

[Valleysboy1978]

Thats not Freedom of Speech.

Freedom of speech means I can go incite racial hatred without being put in Jail. I might get hazed and harassed for it, but the government won't jail me or shut me up. And if the people who are offended by what I say gets violent in their reaction (beyond words and protests), then THEY get to go to jail.No you will be put in jail for inciting racial hatred because it is racist, and fundamentally wrong. If they get violent in their recation then they will also go to jail.

Freedom of speech is just that, free. However like anything in society it must be used with responsibility.

[Shaggy Hiker]

No you will be put in jail for inciting racial hatred because it is racist, and fundamentally wrong. If they get violent in their recation then they will also go to jail.

Freedom of speech is just that, free. However like anything in society it must be used with responsibility.

Depends on the country, I suppose. You can get jailed for inciting racial violence in this country (or any other kind of violence, for that matter), but not inciting hatred. If that were the case, W would be in jail along with pretty much anybody else who opens their mouth.

[capsulecorpjx]

No you will be put in jail for inciting racial hatred because it is racist, and fundamentally wrong. If they get violent in their recation then they will also go to jail.

Freedom of speech is just that, free. However like anything in society it must be used with responsibility.

You have no free speech if there are limits on your speech. The only reasonable legal limit on your speech is that you can't libel or slander against a specific person or organization, then the only penalty is civil (lawsuits).

So there you have it, you guys have no free speech. I mean in U.K., there was censorship laws that said Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles couldn't use nunchuks or have any violence. It has since been repealed, but its kind of scary how extreme your censorship is. You guys care so much about not offending anyone that you guys have become zombies.

[Shaggy Hiker]

No, it wasn't the fear of offense that made them zombies, it was all the booze.

[davebat]

Guys ...

The islamic countries ( People) are not willing to buy products from denmark ... and thats also ... FREE OF ACT ....

they say that they are free to miss with aholly person like mohammed ... well ok ... but arnt muslims free not to buy their products ?????!!!!!



Since Denmarks main exports are bacon, beer and porn I dont think its that much of an issue

[nemaroller]

Since Denmarks main exports are bacon, beer and porn I dont think its that much of an issue

And marijuana... can't forget that one.... or is that a main import? OMG, that's the answer! Get those Islamic fundamentalists hooked on weed!

[Wokawidget]

It's Holland where cannabis is legal, and not Denmark ;)

And England is it's own Island, sperated from Europe if you didn't know that already :D

Woka

[davebat]

You guys care so much about not offending anyone that you guys have become zombies.

Literally

[nemaroller]

It's Holland where cannabis is legal, and not Denmark ;)


Well then I guess Denmark is s@$# out of luck huh.

And England is it's own Island, sperated from Europe if you didn't know that already :D

I did know that but seriously its like 21 miles from the coast of France right? 'Ooo look at us we're 21 miles from the rest of Europe... we're special.'

[yrwyddfa]

No, it wasn't the fear of offense that made them zombies, it was all the booze. . . . and all-American grilled cheese we import from you guys. Zombification by proxy!

[Hack]

In the United States, Freedom of Speech, as defined by out Bill Of Rights, means that you can not be punished if you speak out against the Federal Government.

It does not mean you can yell Fire in a crowded theater.
It does not mean you can incite a riot.

And, it should not mean those things. For those acitivies, you should, and will be, jailed.

[big blue alien]

It does not mean you can yell Fire in a crowded theater.
What about if there is a fire :confused:

[capsulecorpjx]

In the United States, Freedom of Speech, as defined by out Bill Of Rights, means that you can not be punished if you speak out against the Federal Government.

It does not mean you can yell Fire in a crowded theater.
It does not mean you can incite a riot.

And, it should not mean those things. For those acitivies, you should, and will be, jailed.

I understand yelling Fire in a theater.

But incite a riot? Did those cartoons incite a riot? Does that mean all satire of religion should be outlawed? Does that mean all satire of anything should be outlawed because someone might be offended and riot?

Arrest the rioters, not the people who "incite" it, whether directly or by offending said people.

In my opinion, even if I said in public "we should riot", I shouldn't be arrested, the people who followed what I did should.

[demotivater]

By that logic, brutal dictators should be pardoned, but their armies should all be jailed.

[capsulecorpjx]

By that logic, brutal dictators should be pardoned, but their armies should all be jailed.

What? Are you serious?

I think you're using a bad comparison there buddy.

Dictators are in a position of power.

They are responsible for the orders they hand out.

People who try to incite riots are not. There is no legal repurcussion if you refuse to follow somebody trying to incite a riot.

Besides you try to equate inciting a riot with publishing things that offend people to the point of riot (i.e. satirical cartoons).

Both of which I think are free forms of speech. But it is even more ludicrous to think the latter (publishing offensive cartoons) should be illegal.

[demotivater]

What? Are you serious?

I think you're using a bad comparison there buddy.

Dictators are in a position of power.

They are responsible for the orders they hand out.

People who try to incite riots are not. There is no legal repurcussion if you refuse to follow somebody trying to incite a riot.

Besides you try to equate inciting a riot with publishing things that offend people to the point of riot (i.e. satirical cartoons).

Both of which I think are free forms of speech. But it is even more ludicrous to think the latter (publishing offensive cartoons) should be illegal.
It's all perfectly clear now.
:confused: :confused:

[Valleysboy1978]

Dictators are in a position of power.

They are responsible for the orders they hand out.
Indeed, but that is a more obvious form of power. You inciting a riot also shows power over others, but of a more covert nature and as such you are responsible for manipulating the others to follow your desire to riot. As the leader you are responsible and as such would be the first to be jailed.

[capsulecorpjx]

Indeed, but that is a more obvious form of power. You inciting a riot also shows power over others, but of a more covert nature and as such you are responsible for manipulating the others to follow your desire to riot. As the leader you are responsible and as such would be the first to be jailed.

Then Enimem should be thrown in Jail for inciting domestic violence. Gangster rappers should be thrown in jail for inciting gang violence. In fact all music and media should go through a special government comission to make sure it won't cause any negative reaction or cause any offense.

Thats the slippery slope you're going down.

Thats where personal responsibility comes in.

Remember, don't be a moron. Just because someone says it doesn't mean you have to do it. But they have every right to say it, you have every responsibility to not do it if it is wrong.

[Valleysboy1978]

Remember, don't be a moron.Care to re-phrase that? :mad:

[FunkyDexter]

I think there's a fairly fundamental difference between inciting a riot by saying 'Hey, let's all riot' and inciting one by insulting someone enough that they feel the need to kick off.

The first one is already illegal in the UK as it's incitement to commit a crime - which is a crime in and of itself.

The second one is more of a grey area and the question really should be: Should you be allowed to get away with insulting someone or their beliefs just to boost your circulation?

[capsulecorpjx]

I think there's a fairly fundamental difference between inciting a riot by saying 'Hey, let's all riot' and inciting one by insulting someone enough that they feel the need to kick off.

The first one is already illegal in the UK as it's incitement to commit a crime - which is a crime in and of itself.

The second one is more of a grey area and the question really should be: Should you be allowed to get away with insulting someone or their beliefs just to boost your circulation?

For the second one, there is no grey area, it should be allowed, at least in the United States it is. Thats what Free Speech means, it means people do not have the right to not be offended.

For the first one, well just to me, trying to inciting a riot is also free speech. Of course I think it's even illegal in the States.

[capsulecorpjx]

Care to re-phrase that? :mad:

I meant "don't be retarded." And I was referring to people who riot and then blame it on the person who "inciting the riot." People who don't take personal responsibility.

[nkad]

In the United States, Freedom of Speech, as defined by out Bill Of Rights, means that you can not be punished if you speak out against the Federal Government.

It does not mean you can yell Fire in a crowded theater.
It does not mean you can incite a riot.

And, it should not mean those things. For those acitivies, you should, and will be, jailed.


Just to point out a few things. Yelling Fire in a crowed theater isn't a question of free speech, but a question of morals. Therefore, I am within my right to yell Fire, when in fact there isn't. My doing so may lead to consequense, such as being told to leave, or arrest (not for yelling Fire, but rather for not obeying the property owner's request to leave the theather).

Second, your example of inciting a riot has nothing to do with free speech. However, you are corrrect that it is an illegal act. The constitution only protects our right to peaceful assembly.

[hanysaad]

Guys ...

The islamic countries ( People) are not willing to buy products from denmark ... and thats also ... FREE OF ACT ....

they say that they are free to miss with aholly person like mohammed ... well ok ... but arnt muslims free not to buy their products ?????!!!!!

and now because of that ... (not buying their products ) they say that they will burn the holly book of islam infront of all the people in denmark ...

and they call them selves civilized ... !!!!

every body has about idea about muslims ... they think that they are teroreists ... not knowing that muslims believe in jesus as a prophet from god ... and muslims beleive in every holy person in christianity ... but the bad thing is the media ... and when when some bad muslims does something bad ... its said that islam is bad .. and thats wrong ...

when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN ... and thats wrong ... and I am sure if you know islam very well you would change all your thoughts ...
I totally agree with Mosabama...
Muslims Love Prophet Muhamed (peace upon him) more than themselves,thier Fathers and mothers,and more than thier sons....
So, when muslims reply to this offending by not buying Demark products ,this is the least reaction ...
There is very important thing that nobody remark it, it is that muslims did not reply this offending by the same way ,they didnot reply it by offending thier religious or offending their holy sympoles....
they (Denamrk) say that they will burn the holly book of islam infront of all the people in denmark , but we did not see any muslim say " we will burn the holy book of christians".....
This is great thing in muslims religion " Not to reply the offending by another wrong offending"
In additin to that muslims believe in jesus as a prophet from god and respect all prophets
see this article :Jesus in the Glorious Qur'an (http://www3.sympatico.ca/shabir.ally/new_page_24.htm)
this is greatest civilization.....
Isnot this says muslims are not teroreists at all ??!!!
See this article : What Does Islam Say about Terrorism? (http://www.islamdoor.com/Terror.htm)
as Mosabama said "when I say islam .. you remember BEN LADEN"...
why??!!
BEN LADEN isnot the only muslim one in the world!
There is very great samples for muslims around the world like : The Scientist who won Nobel prize in chemistry "Ahmed Zewil",And other scientists like "Farouk El-Baz",Magdy Yaqoup, and more...
please visit this site World Muslims (http://groups.msn.com/MuslimsaroundtheWorld/worldmuslims.msnw)
Finally I want to say that all muslims respect the freedom of speech , and holy Quran say that meaning and they accept the criticism ,and the evidence on this that they discuss with The orientalists and accept them in thier countries, But anyway offending people and holy sympols is not from freedom of speech , it is freedom from responsibility........

[mendhak]

they (Denamrk) say that they will burn the holly book of islam infront of all the people in denmark

When did they say this? Who said it? Got any news links?

[hanysaad]

When did they say this? Who said it? Got any news links?Everyone know that they that, and this news were in everywhere when they said that,if you do not believe me "Mosabama" mention that in his post before me....

[mendhak]

In between, I did a search on what you mentioned. Apparently it was a racist party within Denmark that called for this. "They" != Denmark. That is a dangerous generalization to make.

[space_monkey]

In between, I did a search on what you mentioned. Apparently it was a racist party within Denmark that called for this. "They" != Denmark. That is a dangerous generalization to make.
Kind of ironic don't you think.

BEN LADEN isnot the only muslim one in the world!

yet they turn around and do the same to us. Human nature perhaps? Maybe we're not that different after all.

[mendhak]

Kind of ironic don't you think.


yet they turn around and do the same to us. Human nature perhaps? Maybe we're not that different after all.

Yes, I agree. It all comes down to those territory-type instincts embedded in our psyche.

[Wokawidget]

There is very important thing that nobody remark it, it is that muslims did not reply this offending by the same way ,they didnot reply it by offending thier religious or offending their holy sympoles....

No, that's correct, some Muslims burned down embassies and killed completey innocent people, who probably agreed with them.

You are also generalising Denmark, which is a little hypocritical don't you think?

Woka

[Wally Pipp]

Of course, muslims have been publicizing anti-jew cartoons in islamic publications for years now. Apparently they're allowed to...