|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
mcnally
|
|
response 329 of 432:
| 
Feb 19 07:08 UTC 2006 |
I wonder if he's actually got a million dollars..
|
keesan
|
|
response 330 of 432:
|
Feb 19 14:53 UTC 2006 |
Has any war started for a stranger reason?
|
marcvh
|
|
response 331 of 432:
|
Feb 19 17:39 UTC 2006 |
The War of Jenkin's Ear comes to mind...
|
cross
|
|
response 332 of 432:
|
Feb 19 18:57 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
crimson
|
|
response 333 of 432:
|
Feb 19 18:59 UTC 2006 |
Re #332: Actually (according to legend) it was started because Paris didn't
refuse to take sides in a dispute between three goddesses.
|
cross
|
|
response 334 of 432:
|
Feb 19 19:06 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 335 of 432:
|
Feb 19 23:56 UTC 2006 |
re #328 that was my typo, of course he knows there are three
cartoonists, they have been carrying around posters with their pictures.
They even had a muslim protestor interviewed on cnn who said:
"one drop of muslim blood is worth all the blood in the world. You
insult the Prophet, and you will pay"
This isn't about those cartoons, those cartoons are flashpoints to
rally the faithful, just like those false reports that U.S. soldiers
flushed a Koran down the toilet. The real issue is the U.S invasion of
Iraq, which the radical element in the muslim world equates to a holy
war. They will seize on any issue, even cartoons of the Prophet, that
incites the outrage they want against the U.S. Its ironic that the
Danish are taking the heat for this, because while the cartoonists were
from Denmark, the rage and wrath is against the U.S.
This is further proof that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was a HUGE
mistake, and the mistake only gets worse over time. We didn't solve
anything by invading, and the world is not, repeat NOT, safer now than
it was before. It is far more dangerous, and we are closer to a holy
war, with tens of millions of muslims thinking we are the holy enemy of
the Prophet, than at any time in recent history.
|
richard
|
|
response 336 of 432:
|
Feb 20 00:09 UTC 2006 |
newspapers and web sites around the world are re-printing those
cartoons to show solidarity with the cartoonists and to show support
for the idea of free speech.
Since Grex stands for free speech, I think Grex should re-post those
cartoons on its front web page. Grex has taken stands before, it has
or had the blue ribbon on its page. For every site that is attacked
for posting the cartoons, there must be ten others who post them. Grex
must post these cartoons.
|
cross
|
|
response 337 of 432:
|
Feb 20 01:08 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 338 of 432:
|
Feb 20 01:57 UTC 2006 |
Not for a while, anyway.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 339 of 432:
|
Feb 20 02:48 UTC 2006 |
re #335:
> This isn't about those cartoons, those cartoons are flashpoints to
> rally the faithful, just like those false reports that U.S. soldiers
> flushed a Koran down the toilet. The real issue is the U.S invasion of
> Iraq, which the radical element in the muslim world equates to a holy
> war.
That's a pretty sweeping claim to be offered with no supporting evidence.
> They will seize on any issue, even cartoons of the Prophet, that
> incites the outrage they want against the U.S. Its ironic that the
> Danish are taking the heat for this, because while the cartoonists were
> from Denmark, the rage and wrath is against the U.S.
Actually, "their" outrage over this issue seems to be largely directed at
Europe and (as always) Israel.
> This is further proof that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was a HUGE
> mistake, and the mistake only gets worse over time. We didn't solve
> anything by invading, and the world is not, repeat NOT, safer now than
> it was before. It is far more dangerous, and we are closer to a holy
> war, with tens of millions of muslims thinking we are the holy enemy of
> the Prophet, than at any time in recent history.
Frankly if the ordinary people in the Muslim world persist in insisting
that no depiction or criticism of their prophet can be permitted and
keep trying to enforce their desire with death threats, riots, and violence
against people who are not even parties to the dispute then I AM their
enemy.
Contrast the behavior across much of the Muslim world with the reaction
of Jews when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinajad announced that he
was "retaliating" for the cartoons by soliciting anti-Semitic cartoons
to run in Iranian and Arab newspapers. The strongest reaction so far
has been civil criticism of Ahmedinajad and one Israeli publisher has
proposed his own anti-Semitic cartoon contest, exhorting Jews to submit
their own creations and not let themselves be bested by the Iranians.
|
keesan
|
|
response 340 of 432:
|
Feb 20 03:32 UTC 2006 |
Richard, don't you have a website where you can post graphics?
|
other
|
|
response 341 of 432:
|
Feb 20 06:12 UTC 2006 |
Hey Richard, if you think Grex should post those images then propose a
member vote on it.
For that matter, WHENEVER you feel inclined to post that Grex should do
something, just propose a member vote. I have little doubt that you
will save yourself a lot of time, energy and frustration by skipping all
the derision and rationalization cycles your suggestions seem to
generate.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 342 of 432:
|
Feb 20 06:53 UTC 2006 |
I've been wondering if this Muslim firestorm over these cartoons would
have occurred if the cartoons had been about Muslim terrorists, rather
than about Mohammed. Mohammed is, in fact, not a good target for
cartooning. He lived a long time ago (presumably) and started a new
religion, and then he died. He really isn't much of a target as it is the
living Muslims that are responsible for anything in the Muslim world that
can be the butt of cartoons. Cartoons about irrational Muslim behavior
would be more relevant to current events, as well as better based on
facts.
|
cross
|
|
response 343 of 432:
|
Feb 20 06:58 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 344 of 432:
|
Feb 20 07:15 UTC 2006 |
At least those cartoons had some relevance. If you are going to start riots
I think you should do it on logical bases.
|
bru
|
|
response 345 of 432:
|
Feb 20 13:01 UTC 2006 |
Actuallly, this is a far more dangerous situation. This is a war based on
ideologies that are totally incompatible. It has very little to do with
religion.
If Islam keeps grabbing for these flash points to ignite the faithful, this
is going to turn into a very protracted and unforgiving conflict that will
make WWII seem like a day at the beach.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 346 of 432:
|
Feb 20 13:55 UTC 2006 |
resp:344 Although, if people were to use logic- there wouldn't
necessarily BE any riots. ;)
|
happyboy
|
|
response 347 of 432:
|
Feb 20 18:05 UTC 2006 |
re345: well in that case, praise the lord that we have
he-men like you to protect us, bruse.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 348 of 432:
|
Feb 20 18:34 UTC 2006 |
Re #345: actually, these events have *everything* to do with religion, and
primarily related to the desire of the religious hierarchy to stay in
power.
It is classic for those in power to forment popular fervor in order to
hold onto or fortify their power. The Muslim heirarchy do it and so did
the Christian hierarchy for many centuries.
It was the rise of democracy that finally diluted the political power of
religious hierarchies, though even in democracies one always sees the
stirring of the existing, less powerful, religous hierarchies striving to
increase their power.
We have actually heard from some of the militant Muslim organizations how
they oppose democracy. They cast it in terms of being un-Islamic, but this
just reflects their wish to hold onto their power.
|
richard
|
|
response 349 of 432:
|
Feb 20 19:47 UTC 2006 |
re#341 Other, there wasn't a member vote on the blue ribbon thing was
there? I thought we only have member votes to amend the bylaws and
elect board members.
The decision to place the free speech blue ribbon on grex's web page
was made by the board I assume. I recall some people here weren't at
all happy with that decision, but the members didn't make it the board
did.
I am surprised that you cannot see how anyone forcing censorship-- as
these radical muslims are doing through terrorism-- should be something
we all ought to be against. I am surprised that you cannot see that
Grex has no reason to exist if it does not have fostering the ideals of
free speech as an implied part of its mission.
This is a problem Grex has now. Grex has become ingrown and closed
off, and few people seem to think, as the founders did, that Grex can
still have a greater purpose and mission. Posting those cartoons would
be using Grex, what it is and what its supposed to be about, for the
common good. It would be Grex fulfilling its mission the same as its
refusing to stop offering email simply because of spammers. If you
don't take chances, if you don't stand up for what is right, you don't
make the best case for what you are.
Nothing could speak greater for Grex, and its mission, than to offer
itself as a place where those cartoons can be posted and where no
amount of pressure can stop it.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 350 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:18 UTC 2006 |
My answer to you is the same as my suggestion to Dan Cross. If you
want Grex to take a major policy stance, put forth a proposal which
can be voted on by the membership.
|
richard
|
|
response 351 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:32 UTC 2006 |
re #350 and my answer to you mcnally is to repeat what I just said,
which is that the membership ONLY VOTES to amend the bylaws and elect
board members. There is no provision allowing the members to vote on
anything else. This therefore, just as with the blue ribbon thing,
cannot be put before the membership.
The board can decide, or staff.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 352 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:36 UTC 2006 |
item:coop,2
Bylaws Article 5, Section a: "Any member of Grex may make a motion by entering
it as the text of a discussion item in a computer conference on Grex designated
for this purpose ..." Section b: "A motion will be considered to have passed
if more votes were cast in favor than against, *except as provided for bylaw
amendments.*" [emphasis added]. Note that bylaw amendments are completely
separate from member motions.
|
richard
|
|
response 353 of 432:
|
Feb 20 20:45 UTC 2006 |
re #352 my bad, but it doesn't say that a membership vote is NECESSARY
for anything other than board elections and bylaw amendments. In fact
there is nothing in there stating which other types of proposals
require member votes.
For example, staff did not recently seek a member vote to restrict
email privileges. It didn't have to. Maybe it should have. But
nothing in the bylaws specifies which types of proposals need member
votes.
I submit that I do not think that posting three cartoons on the grex
web page is such a big deal that it requires a member vote. It is
certainly not as big a deal as restricting email privs
|