well I'm glad wherever you live doesn't ban the books/information/images you like,

and please explain how your independent v corporate comment changes the fact that whatever book
you're on about is there in your hands, as opposed to being banned with a ridiculous social upheaval?

EDIT: you didn't really explain why you jumped on "Jewish actions" yet.

What I would like to know is where the abundance of Danish flags came from? FFS, anytime someone pisses off the radicals, they're in the streets with the offenders flag in 10 minutes flat. Someone must be making a mint.

[quote="Eight Ace":7d965]well I'm glad wherever you live doesn't ban the books/information/images you like,

and please explain how your independent v corporate comment changes the fact that whatever book
you're on about is there in your hands, as opposed to being banned with a ridiculous social upheaval?

EDIT: you didn't really explain why you jumped on "Jewish actions" yet.[/quote:7d965]
I jumped on jewish actions is because they go unreported in western media. I could tell something about Israel to somebody on this board on they wouldn't know it...mainly because western media doesn't report it. Media statistics in the arab world are rare especially about reporting...but who in the west watches al jazeera to get the daily news? they would rather get it from cnn. That's why I wish people would read certain sites to get the daily news, the info is there you just need to search for it.

My independent v corporate case is justifiable I think. Somebody like Noam Chomsky for example (a far left critic on foreign policy and media) his books come out from South End Press a independent publisher and other independent publishers. He has said that corporate publishers do not wish to run his material because of his controversial books. Just like how he is banned from going on certain media outlets. Gwynne Dyer (A canadian military historian) was banned from writing articles in the jerusalem post because conrad black, a canadian conservative who ran the paper disagreed with what he had to say so he banished him from all the papers he runs (he owned alot when he was big). I can give you a site that shows which corporations run the main publishers if you like. Information does get out don't get me wrong, but only some voices are heard rather than all.

lol, that would be like expecting the islamic media to be up-front about the activities of their own society, the everyday outrages of sharia law, honor killings of girls, inter-sect killings, all religion based, can you imagine their idea of jail, interrogation and torture, or who is in all these islamic mass graves..?....no, because you have "sympathy for them", and you are as racist as anyone else here.


whatever, enjoy ur read.

Apparently someone witnessed protestors setting fire to the Danish Embassy in Damascus but I can't find a very informative article about it yet. I don't know if there were innocent people inside the building or what.

[quote:ca728]Witnesses said the demonstrators set fire to the entire building, which also houses the embassies of Chile and Sweden.[/quote:ca728]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/ ... index.html

[quote="Eight Ace":5242b]lol, that would be like expecting the islamic media to be up-front about the activities of their own society, the everyday outrages of sharia law, honor killings of girls, inter-sect killings, all religion based, can you imagine their idea of jail, interrogation and torture, or who is in all these islamic mass graves..?....no, because you have "sympathy for them", and you are as racist as anyone else here.


whatever, enjoy ur read.[/quote:5242b]

Atleast you pointed out everyone else is. And just because I have sympathy for them doesn't mean I'm "blinded" from the truth. I read about the sharia law and all those other things. It's unfortunate it really is, but I have sympathy in regard to their struggle with the west not with the struggle within their own religion among their own people, that is better argued amongst themselves and not the west.

So you don't believe publishers are in a sense blocking out information or voices? I would enjoy seeing how you would counter this argument seeing as you have said barely anything.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/ ... index.html[/quote:ac469]


Really fucking stupid, I swear to god, get over your fucking selves. Lets burn down an embassy over some piddley shit.

Denmark is so cool cry: Fucking Syrians

Lets see danish draw a cartoon showing them as violent people, and they respond not by saying they are disappointed, renounce them something. No they fucking go apeshit, burn their flag, scream and threaten to start kidnapping euro's and then burn down the danish embassy, then march on over to the norweigen ebassy and to the same thing.

That helps dispell the myths

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/200 ... 5-sun.html

Wow Muslims that are thinking... Western Muslims > Eastern Muslims

[quote:e6573]Soharwardy said, adding the violent protests seen elsewhere will only serve to reinforce negative images of Islam. [/quote:e6573]

Huntingtons theory of "the clash of civilizations" has been set...the fault lines are set...if all of you don't know what I'm talking about (I'm sure most of you don't) read Samuel P. Huntingtons "the clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order" it will change your perspective on everything..many intellects in think tanks, from what I'm reading, agree that this is the next step.

many also think his theory is a piece of crap.

Links to this dissent.

Also this may suprise/piss off people.

UPDATE 2-U.S. backs Muslims in European cartoon dispute
(Adds more from U.S. official, background on U.S. cartoon)

By Saul Hudson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States backed
Muslims Friday against European newspapers that printed
caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in a move that could help
America's battered image in the Islamic world.
Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning
rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the
United States sided with Muslims outraged that the publications
put press freedom over respect for religion.
"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of
Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in
answer to a question.
"We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press
and expression but it must be coupled with press
responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this
manner is not acceptable."
He said he had no comment as to why the United States chose
to pass judgment in a dispute that ostensibly does not involve
America.
"We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for
their religious beliefs and practices," he added.
The United States, which before the Sept. 11 attacks was
criticized for insensitivity to the Islamic culture, has become
more attuned to Muslim sensibilities.
Accusations last year that U.S. officials desecrated the
Koran sparked deadly riots in Asia and heightened that
awareness.
Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons,
which include depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist and offend
believers as blasphemous.
In contrast, some European media responded to the criticism
against the Danish newspaper that originally printed the
caricatures by reproducing the images and fueled anger that has
led to boycotts of Danish products and widespread protests.
Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics at the University
of San Francisco and a Bush administration critic, said the
United States was responsible for creating far more anger in
the Muslim world because of its invasion of Iraq.
"The United States is the last nation that should caution
against unnecessarily inflaming sentiments in the Muslim
world," he said.
The official U.S. response also contrasted with European
governments, which have tended to acknowledge the tension
between free speech and respect for religion but have generally
accepted the newspapers' rights to print the cartoons.
The U.S. criticism of the newspapers also comes after the
Pentagon complained over a Washington Post cartoon.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff sent an unusual letter to the
editor published Thursday, denouncing as "reprehensible" and
"beyond tasteless" a cartoon earlier in the week portraying
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as insensitive to U.S. troop
casualties.
The cartoon portrayed a soldier who had lost his arms and
legs with Rumsfeld at his hospital bedside saying, "I'm listing
your condition as 'battle hardened."'
REUTERS

Reut 13:25 02-03-06

another day another building torched

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/0 ... index.html

You know I think all this rioting and burning down buildings is actually really gonna help their image.. annoy: