I should have been clearer... by larger 'axe', "and often weild, with awsome results", I was refering to the capacity for violence... so that when we swing our axe (or more accurately, our "leaders" swing it), nonchalantly, 500,000 Iraqi children die, whereas when they grind theirs, on a more popular level, we see some sparks fly - riots, small-scale violenceOriginally posted by judge wopner
but i dotn think collectively there is the same level of hatred by the populace.
but i cant agree with the notoin that there is a collective hatred in the "west" against muslims that is stronger than muslims anti-western attitudes.
I think, as do many others, that a lot of the anger at 'the West' is at our policies, not at the ideas we claim to represent (presumably in contrast with 'theirs'), such as freedom of speech, or liberalism (though perhaps moral decay - Britney Spears (who is condemned even among North American Liberals), thats a guess)i think the ignorant folk from both sides dont hate eachother so much as they hate the "idea" of what the other represents. the problem is figuring out what each side actually represents.
Shit - You got me! *collapses in tears as argument comes crumbling down*... okay sryOriginally posted by Vincent Vega
First of all, how is one "racist" against a religion? Or are you yourself attributing one "race" to all muslims?
Its "all the rage" as in, 'it is popular'. Where? Here. Watch television. Go to the movies and play video-games (especially violent ones). Listen to the President's speeches.Secondly, please substantiate that blanket statement with a bit of evidence other than sweeping generalizations. How is it all the rage, and where?
"Why" aren't I? Uh, thats kind of a different side of the issue, different question I suppose. Anyway I could have sworn I did say earlier that its interesting there isnt violent reaction here, a place known to be more tolerant, respectful, multicultural, etc... Cant find the post, maybe I didnt end up posting itThirdly, why are you not drawing any distinctions between the experiences of muslims in different western nations? Some would argue that the integration of muslims into, say, French society has not gone as smoothly as their integration into Canadian society for example. Or are we in Canada also collectively guilty of this "violent racist hatred" you keep going back to?
I take it you mean reflection of the will of said Western populations... In that sense, I think the policies are almost never reflections/expressions of their will, and are very often contrary to itAnd finally, while the policies of certain Western governments can certainly be construed as being violent and aggressive towards certain muslim/Arab nations, do you feel that those policies are always an accurate reflection of the populace in said Western nations?
Nor do they fit the "Muslim = religious fanatic; terrorist" and "West/U.S. = awsome nobility; just power" models that clearly dominant in scale and influence over the model that sees global political hegemony criticallyOriginally posted by judge wopner
i think at differnt levels and in differnt regions of the world there is definite oppression. but very often its at the hands of western and non-wester powers alike. hence the reason i find it racially or ethnocentrically bothersome that people fail to see the diversity within the muslim world itself and the wide aray of opinions coming from within that do not fit the proto-typical "usa/jews bad" model.
What is this nonsense? The original cartoons are pretty goofy and lame and often aren't really saying much of anything at all. They're hardly inciting hatred or encouraging murder.Originally posted by man_slut
"directly and deliberately stirring up hatred against Jewish people and encouraging murder of those he referred to as non-believers." Certainly the same could be said of the cartoonist.
from the StarIran renames Danish pastries
Feb. 16, 2006. 12:50 PM
TEHRAN â€” Iranians love Danish pastries, but now when they look for the flaky dessert at the bakery they have to ask for ``Roses of the Prophet Muhammad."
Bakeries across the capital were covering up their ads for Danish pastries today after the confectioners union ordered the name change in retaliation for cartoons of Islam's revered Prophet first published in a Danish newspaper.
The move was reminiscent of a decision by the US House of Representatives in 2004 to rename French fries "freedom fries" after France refused to back the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
"Given the insults by Danish newspapers against the prophet, as of now the name of Danish pastries will give way to Rose of Mohammad' pastries," the confectioners union said in its order.
"This is a punishment for those who started misusing freedom of expression to insult the sanctities of Islam," said Ahmad Mahmoudi, a cake-shop owner in northern Tehran.
One of Tehran's most popular bakeries, named Danish Patries, covered up the word Danish on its sign with a black banner emblazoned Oh Hussein, a reference to a martyred saint of Shiite Islam. The banner is a traditional sign of mourning.
The shop owner refused to speak, reluctant to be drawn into discussion over the issue.
In Zartosht street in central Tehran, cake shop owner Mahdi Pedari didn't cover up the words "Danish pastries" on his menu, but put the new name next to it.
"I did so just to inform my customers that Rose of Mohammad is the new name for Danish pastries," he said.
Some customers took immediately to the new name. But others asked for "roses of Muhammad" â€” "gul-e-muhammadi" in Farsi â€” with a laugh or even with sarcasm, apparently unenthused about the new form of protest.
"I just want the sweet pastries. I have nothing to do with the name," housewife Zohreh Masoumi told the man at the counter in one shop.
Iranians are big sweets eaters, often buying candies and pastries to bring to parties. While there are many types of Iranian-style sweets, Danish pastries â€” flaky pastry with fruit or chocolate between the layers â€” are extremely popular.
The pastries are domestically baked, not imported. Iran has cut all commercial ties with Denmark.
The cartoons, first published in Denmark in September then reprinted by other western newspapers over the last month as a support for freedom of expression â€” have sparked sometimes violent protests in Iran as well as demonstrations across the Islamic world, where they were seen as an insult to the Prophet.
The article doesn't mention that U of T's Student Council was opposed to the cartoon and lobbied to have the papers depicting the cartoon removed from campus.deevah said:Jesus and Mohammed Smooching: Gay 'Tolerance' Cartoon Published by University of Toronto
By John-Henry Westen
TORONTO, February 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The University of Toronto's Victoria College student newspaper The Strand, has used the controversy surrounding the cartoons ridiculing Islam to bash Christianity and Islam simultaneously. Accompanying an article on the cartoon controversy, the paper published a cartoon of its own depicting Jesus smooching with Mohammed in the "Tolerance Tunnel".
"The cartoon is a sort of Canadian statement on religious tolerance," Nick Ragaz, managing editor of The Strand, the student newspaper of Victoria University at U of T told the Toronto Star. "This is not an act of hate," he said. "It's controversial, yes, but it's no attack," said Ragaz.
The University is backing the controversial piece. Paul Gooch, president of Victoria University said "The editorial in this issue of The Strand provokes and invites discussion, not intolerance." The Strand editorial cartoon, "however offensive to some members of our community, could not be characterized as a violation of the Human Rights Code, the Criminal Code, or the applicable University policies at Vic or U of T," the Star reports Gooch having wriiten.
However, the University of Toronto tends to be selective when it comes to freedom of speech.
In 2004, a pro-life club at the university wanted to present a pictorial display which graphically compared abortion to historically recognized genocides. The University of Toronto obstructed the free speech rights of its pro-life students. The university insisted that the display be erected in an open-sided tent with most of the posters facing inwards, making it virtually impossible for the signs to be seen from outside the tent. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/04032405.html )
The University seems to be particularly sensitive when it comes to homosexuality. When internationally renowned Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft delivered a talk at the university in 2003 which expounded Catholic teaching on homosexuality, the Student administrative council passed a resolution to declare the talk as hate and demanded an official hate-speech investigation. (coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/feb/030214a.html )
Finally, the university has been openly discriminating in hiring practices against those not sharing its left-leaning ideology. In 1999, an ad for a tenure-track professorship at the University of Toronto appeared in the August bulletin of the Canadian Association of University Teachers saying that only candidates with a "feminist and anti-racist perspective" need apply. At the time, University of Toronto Professor Thomas Pangle, said that the ad "makes explicit what I had thought was usually only implicit, namely, that ideological conformity was the chief prerequisite for such a position at our university." (coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/1999/oct/99102205.html )
sorry i couldn't find the article that was posted in one w/ the cdn newspapers
ha ha ha!! what tom foolery.deevah said:"The editorial in this issue of The Strand provokes and invites discussion, not intolerance." The Strand editorial cartoon, "however offensive to some members of our community, could not be characterized as a violation of the Human Rights Code, the Criminal Code, or the applicable University policies at Vic or U of T," the Star reports Gooch having wriiten.