Obviously cause they wanted to incite a jihad and thats not the way christians do things oOo:

how do you know they havent in the past?

We have no idea that they did make cartoons against christianity in the past, the article doesnt say so and I cant find much on the internet - found that the newspaper sits on the right of the spectrum, may have some bearing to the decisions made. But I do believe if they passed on cartoons that made priests laugh they missed a valid opportunity. Instead they decided to go against the Koran that forbids imagery of the prophet. Any way you look at it the danes screwed up big time.

I'm so glad that you have decided that the rest of us must follow the Qur'an. Is there anything else we can do for you today.


So remember, free speach for all, unless the iman doesn't like it. stupid:

The Last Straw?
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?c ... 7120&par=0

stupid:

states did just the same.

[quote:4c83e]The name change recalls when some Americans started calling French fries, "Freedom fries" to protest France's opposition to the United States-led invasion of Iraq.
[/quote:4c83e]

The Danish people are soooo awesome. Fuck those arab countries.

[/quote:0ee7e]

too bad that was like one resturant/deli in the house of reps..not the entire nation. sleeping:

too bad that was like one resturant/deli in the house of reps..not the entire nation. sleeping:[/quote:7284c]

and it was a joke really, it wasn't serious.

Well if it's gone untouched for so many years why bring it up now? Is it that we have adopted modernity so that basically means nothing is taboo?

Freedom of speech for all? Indeed, until the newspaper said no to christian cartoons and yes to muslim ones.. rolleyes:
Freedom of speech for the rolling stones when they had their mic cut off for a few seconds because of sexually explicit lyrics at the super bowl...indeed America has broken a small taboo. oOo:

and it was a joke really, it wasn't serious.[/quote:86d22]


i dont see the funny side.

you don't live in America...

weak ass muslims trying to come up with a comeback with shit like 'muhammed' pastry, gtfo. strudel and entenmanns > muhammed pastry.

you don't live in Iran...

You don't live in Iran either.

I don't think it was a smart move. If you want to make things worse and create far more tension - Then do what the europeans did and re-publish the images.

I mean, honestly, if you want to make a point about free speech regarding Islam, was this really the time to make it? I mean the relationship between the middle east and western society is pretty well fucked at the moment, and doing stuff like this at this point in time is making it really bad, and forcing a solid division.

I don't agree with the way they reacted, but then again, I see it as sort of childish to provoke in the way that these newspapers did, and I see it as just plain foolish to do it at this point in time....

What does it prove anyway? I mean it's obvious they have the right to exercise free speech - They don't live in dictatorships - The newspapers would allow them to print, and they know it. So what is the point? Just to spite muslims? Wow, that's a mature way to handle a very tender issue, during a very unstable time.

These people just need to look at the bigger picture - People are getting to involved in picking sides in this thing and not looking out for the greater good.

well one of Huntington's "civilizations" is Islam. But the Middle Eastern Muslims are the only ones reacting to the cartoon. The Indonesian muslims (a very, very large percentage of muslims live in Indonesia and it's surrounding areas) aren't reacting the same way at all? Huntington's theory would have suggested that they are similar cultures and are thus linked into a civilization and would act similarly, yet the haven't. That's because they are more different than Huntington suggests. He lumped people into too broad categories to simplify his theory, when in reality such broad divisions in the global population is not realistic. People in specific states are more different than he gives them credit for, and it was seen in the reaction to the cartoon.

[url:0ff51]http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060203/wl_afp/europeislammediaindonesia[/url:0ff51]
[url:0ff51]http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/191316/1/.html[/url:0ff51]

oOo:

but read the articles, they said it was dozens, less than 100, and that is in the world's most populous muslim country. they are hardly reacting at all compared to the people in the middle east and taking the amount of muslims in the coutnry into consideration.

weren't they also re-published in NZ?

Did you read both articles?

[quote:a37bc]About 100 members of the Front of the Defenders of Islam (FPI) massed outside the building, chanting: "Let's go jihad! We're ready for jihad!". One of their banners said: "Let's slaughter the Danish ambassador!"[/quote:a37bc]

[quote:a37bc]In Surabaya, Indonesia's second largest city, a group of about 300 Muslims rallied outside the Danish representative office.[/quote:a37bc]

oOo:

You're obviously basing your opinion here on media attention, because that has generally been focused on the middle east.

[quote="Eight Ace":9cf72]weren't they also re-published in NZ?[/quote:9cf72]

Yeah, and I thought that was fucking stupid of the newspaper - Putting the rest of the country at risk just to show they have a huge penis. Our Prime Minister also condemed it.

[quote:c0048]In Surabaya, Indonesia's second largest city, a group of about 300 Muslims rallied outside the Danish representative office.[/quote:c0048]

oOo:

You're obviously basing your opinion here on media attention, because that has generally been focused on the middle east.[/quote:c0048]

ok, 400 people out of 200 million...still very unimpressive.

oOo:

You're obviously basing your opinion here on media attention, because that has generally been focused on the middle east.[/quote:e445f]

ok, 400 people out of 200 million...still very unimpressive.[/quote:e445f]

Well...Have you got the figures for the middle eastern muslims??

Didn't think so.

...and even then, there are probably alot more than the figures I quoted - Like I said, the media has been focusing its attention far more on the middle east simply because of what's been going on over there recently - So there is going to be less reporting of Indonesian muslim reactions to this latest issue.

Regardless though, Machette is right about Huntington - The division is being caused by conflicting ideals and morals, a result of troubled middle eastern-western relations....The middle east reaction is obviously going to be at least a little bit more extreme simply because that area of the world has also been physically fucked with by westerners. Not like Indonesia, and even so, there is still strong indonesian reaction which supports that point.

when you say that the middle east is going to act differently than indonesia because they've been through different things, it proves my point. they can't all be lumped into the group that he lumps them into. Middle eastern muslims are different than indonesian muslims because they experience different things because of their different cultures/geographical location. Huntington's theory is too simple, the indonesians won't go to war just because the middle easter people with the same religion do, it won't happen.

Don't get me wrong, Huntington's theory has some good points to it that make sense, but I'm not gonna just beleive it because I read it so it must be true. There is a lot of controversy over his theory, I feel some people just read it and cite it to sound smart and think it's a unanimous opinion in the world and that it must be true.

and I still don't think that Indonesia has protested or become nearly as upset as some middle eastern countries.

The Indonesian reaction IS strong, considering they have no other reason to have problems with western society. I bet if there hadn't been all this shit in the middle east recently then the middle eastern reaction would be the same or similar to the Indonesian reaction - but because they have more reason to hate westerners, there is a stronger reaction.

Huntingtons point is that islam and other group's morals and ideals conflict so drastically that if they're thrown in together, there will be hostilities...

That means that while there is a difference between the middle eastern muslim, and the asian muslim (a result of geography) its essentially the same group of people with the same ideals.

They may not side with them in a war now, but it is far to early to say - This is just the beginning of the division, as the western hate for islam breeds and vice versa, there will be more problems.
As soon as there is an issue regarding south-east asian muslims (There has already been a bomb or two aimed at westerners in Bali), then things will heat up and you'll see them side with middle eastern muslims, when they're catching hate from us westerners.

If there is an attack on Australia, it will most probably come from Indonesia, and thats when the shit will hit the fan, and Huntingtons theory will start to look pretty damn likely.

but that would be by al Qaeda or other terrorists, that is different than what huntington was saying. he said that nation states or massive groups of people within them would go to war with other nation states or groups of people that are in the same "civilization" if anyone does any attacking, it would probably be terrorist groups, small bands of extremists. The average muslim is not going to attack anybody. If this situation with Iran comes to conflict, I doubt Indonesia would have anything to do with it, Huntington would suggest they would.

Look back a decade ago at global islam-western relations, and look at them now. At this rate, I don't think you should write off Indonesian support of a muslim jihad in future....and of course not every muslim is going to fight. I don't think Huntington ever suggested that, but it's likely there will be enough to have a conflict...All it takes is a strategically placed bomb in downtown Sydney, with support from the Indonesian government (It's not impossible - The Malaysian Prime Minister has supported holy war on Jews) and an Australian reaction would toss the two nations into conflict.

Also beare in mind that Indonesia is spilling at the sides, and has had a series of problems with Australia in the past. The East Timor conflict also represents that Indonesians are familiar with war against "Christians," and have the will to fight a long war.

Anything can happen, Huntington's theory is extremely valid, imo.

Ok. You just seem to agree with him more than I do, that's fine. We'll see how things pan out, it could go either way.

When racist jokes go wrong.

P.S. what do you call a girl with one leg?


ILENE


What do you call a chinese girl with one leg?



IRENE!

Huntington's theory which as you pointed out was highly controversial, no one believed that what he explained would ever some true. I remember one part of his book he listed this statistic about muslims/catholics/buddhists/hinduism and other religions and the stats showed that over time muslims would over take christianity in a number of years (2025 I beleive, dont have the book on me so I can't tell you exactly) but he beleived that the world right now was split up into different sections - Muslim world, orthodox christian world etc...and he saw these worlds sooner or later clashing. Foreign policy would not be based on ideology any more it would be based on culture. I get your point about it being something in which you read and everyone is quick to use it as a footnote, but I believe that Hungtinton was really catching on to something with his theory and its extremely manipulative. (I remember coming out with a totally different outlook on foreign affairs after reading it)

I know the theory, you don't have to tell me... I just find myself skeptical of it considering that most conflict since he came up with his theory in 1993 has been within civilizations, not among civilizations. There was a study that said something like 70% of conflicts after 1993 were between people in the same civilization (consider african conflict, etc..)

Well he wrote in his theory that africa was a messed up continent and thats common sense really, he said that Africa's only leading nation would be South Africa. But look at Iraq many believe that Bush and Cheney among his staff read Hungtintons theory and took it the wrong way. I think they ultimately did but thats another argument for another day. Look at the Chechnya conflict its between two religions - orthodox christians vs muslims.

Also I repeated some facts in his theory so others could base a opinion on the matter, not trying to make you look stupid or anything.

machete you are one politicly correct fuckin prick..how would you/your loved ones like to die in an explosion, covered in muslim remains you cunt..

You have provided nothing but ignorant statements. When you say something worthy of an argument maybe you can go noticed. But if you continue to use swear words in your replies calling people fucking idiots because of their views, it makes you look like an idiot yourself.

HELLO! Welcome to our wonderful board!




....Now get the fuck out you raving scumcunt, we have no more room for shit stirring penispickers around here. Don't let the door smack you on your gaping asshole on the way out.

ban:

oOo:

New Zealand has a sizable population of Muslims, according to their 2001 census, the number of Muslims rose 74% from 1996 to 2001.