• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Yosemite Sam named new ambassador to Muslimland

man_slut

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Big Harv
This Iranian regime obviously has a disgustingly anti-Israel agenda and are using the cartoon published by a Danish newspaper without a Jewish connection as a pretext to further said agenda.
Would that agenda be WORLD DOMINATION? *sinister voice* Do you think Iran is going to attack a country with Nuclear weapons?
 

Eclipze

TRIBE Member
The cartoons were first printed back in Sept. 30 with little reaction. About 3,500 Danish Muslims protested. So why is there such a long delay in between the cartoons being published and the angry "spontaneous" riots? Also where are they getting all these Danish flags to burn? and why do i keep seeing Saudi flags being waved in the protests? watch for it next time. Not only do the rioters seemed to have a lot of Saudi flags but a lot of other professionally-printed banners and signs. Clearly the rallies were organized and financed. And why the hell did the Syrian and Lebanese governments allowed the protests to rise to the point of burning down the embassies?

Why dont we see the same commitment in demonstrating against the extremists that hold Islam hostage with suicide bombings killing 50 people in London? 80 tourisits in Egypt? or that Bali nightclub. How about all these beheadings,or when Saudi's religious police refused to let 15 girls escape a school fire because they weren't wearing correct Islamic dress. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm
 

Big Harv

TRIBE Member
This picture was posted on the Arab-European League website :

Hitler and Anne Frank

As tasteless and disgusting as that picture is and as angry as I feel staring at it knowing that people today make a mockery of and try to deny that the Holocaust happened, the asshole who drew that had every right to do so. I don't think hate speech laws should infringe on the right to freedom of expression, even if the expression is deplorable, whether it's Mohammad with a bomb on his head or Anne Frank and Hitler in bed. Let the marketplace of ideas and not government sort out what people should or should be exposed to.
 

wayne kenoff

TRIBE Member
^^ agreed. I've never been a big fan of hate muzzle laws. If I've got a racist living next door, I want to know about it.

Setting aside the whole Isreali/Palestinian mess for a moment,

I want to know where Muslims get off openly hating Europeans. I want to know why I'm supposedly a racist (hi deafplayer) for thinking that is total bullshit. Why should I condone people hating people of my ancestry? And violently acting upon it? I can understand anti-American and anti-Israeli _political_ sentiment but it really seems to me that many Muslims have an axe to grind with anybody who is white.
 

Big Harv

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by wayne kenoff
^^ agreed. I've never been a big fan of hate muzzle laws. If I've got a racist living next door, I want to know about it.

Setting aside the whole Isreali/Palestinian mess for a moment,

I want to know where Muslims get off openly hating Europeans. I want to know why I'm supposedly a racist (hi deafplayer) for thinking that is total bullshit. Why should I condone people hating people of my ancestry? And violently acting upon it? I can understand anti-American and anti-Israeli _political_ sentiment but it really seems to me that many Muslims have an axe to grind with anybody who is white.
Several reasons that account for the tension between "native Euorpean" and Muslim immigrants in Euro countries: y some Muslims ha ve not let go of historical grievances relating to British/French colonial activity in Muslim dominated countries. Others perceive current discrimination and Isalmophobia in European countries that prevent Muslims from securing decent jobs and assimilating into the nation's cultural fabric. Still others are extremely sensitive about how their religion is portrayed in the medial and will snap at any provocation(see the Theo van Gogh murder in Amsterdam)
 

deafplayer

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by wayne kenoff
I want to know where Muslims get off openly hating Europeans. I want to know why I'm supposedly a racist (hi deafplayer) for thinking that is total bullshit. Why should I condone people hating people of my ancestry? And violently acting upon it? I can understand anti-American and anti-Israeli _political_ sentiment but it really seems to me that many Muslims have an axe to grind with anybody who is white.
Hi Wanker. I want to know why I supposedly suppose you to be a racist for thinking racism is bullshit. Why are you asking for reasons to condone violent racist hatred?
The sad part is, that many Westerners have (a far larger) axe to grind, and very often weild, with awsome results, against whoever their leaders say
These days, racism against Muslims is all the rage
 
Last edited:

wayne kenoff

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by deafplayer

These days, racism against Muslims is all the rage
I would say the reverse is true.

I don't see Danish people marching in the streets chanting "Death to Muslims". You don't think chanting " Death to Denmark" and "Death to France" is racist? I wouldn't even give a shit except they seem to be backing up those threats with actual violence.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by deafplayer
Hi Wanker. I want to know why I supposedly suppose you to be a racist for thinking racism is bullshit. Why are you asking for reasons to condone violent racist hatred?
The sad part is, that many Westerners have (a far larger) axe to grind, and very often weild, with awsome results, against whoever their leaders say
These days, racism against Muslims is all the rage

wesetern states via their foreign policy i agree are very aggressive towards many mid-east and/or muslim states. 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. theres too many muslims and non-christian/caucasian living in the west who comprise part of the what the "west" is to separate the 2 sides as such.

i dont see any major north american newspapers publishing cartoons as insulting as the danish ones were. in fact both the Star and the Globe, the biggest papers in Canada have condemmed such behvaiour.

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. theres so many non-muslims and muslims who are friends, partners and family in the west and the mid-east, theres so much commonality in our cultures and mixing of idea and traditions to really cast this great divide between everyone.

remember, on the whole, europeans mistreated jews on a much grander scale that muslims ever did in the 20th, centruy, when a nation or culture blames one specific group for all their problems.

why is it so difficult to see the foolishness of muslims or any group for that matter focusing their hatred at one culture or state as the source of their problems, and the solution being eradication of said state or at the very least the expulsion of state agents from "their" lands. (im talking at you too isreal)
 

coleridge

TRIBE Member
French weekly reprints cartoons
Muslim groups lose court bid to halt publication


PARIS, France (Reuters) -- The French satirical weekly Charlie-Hebdo on Wednesday reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed which have caused outrage in the Muslim world, saying it was upholding the democratic right of free expression.

French Muslim organizations had tried to prevent the weekly from publishing the 12 cartoons, which were first printed by the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten, but a court rejected their suit on Tuesday on a technicality.

The front page of the magazine carried a new cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed burying his face in his hands and saying: "It's hard to be loved by fools."

Inside pages carried the Danish cartoons and an editorial explaining the decision to reprint them.

"When extremists extract concessions from democracies on points of principle, either by blackmail or terror, democracies do not have long left," Charlie-Hebdo editor Philippe Val wrote in the editorial.

Sources at Charlie-Hebdo said the weekly's offices and some staff had been placed under police protection.

Several French and other European newspapers have reprinted the 12 cartoons first published by Jyllands-Posten, sparking protests that have turned violent in some countries.

In Afghanistan police clashed with a stone-throwing crowd protesting against the cartoons on Wednesday, killing two demonstrators and wounding 16.

Islam prohibits any depiction of the Prophet Mohammed.

As well as publishing the Danish cartoons, Charlie-Hebdo published other cartoons on its back page which caricatured other religions including Christianity and Judaism.
 

Vincent Vega

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by deafplayer
These days, racism against Muslims is all the rage
Huh?

First of all, how is one "racist" against a religion? Or are you yourself attributing one "race" to all muslims?

Secondly, please substantiate that blanket statement with a bit of evidence other than sweeping generalizations. How is it all the rage, and where?

Thirdly, 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?

And 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?
 

man_slut

TRIBE Member
An American Indian's View of the Cartoons

Such Depictions Have Been Used as a Weapon Against Oppressed Peoples for Centuries

An American Indian's View of the Cartoons
By ROBERT ROBIDEAU

Reading the first news reports about the cartoons depicting Muhammid as a terrorist reminded me of the unfriendly media that printed the then Attorney Gerneral of for South Dakota, William Janklows` vigilante order, "The only way to deal with the Indian problem in South Dakota is to put a gun to the AIM leaders' heads and pull the trigger." Such ethnically hostile and abusive reporting by mainstream media was what helped to kill more than 60 American Indians and assault hundreds more during the federal governments reign of terror that occurred between 1973 and 1975 on the Pine Ridge Oglala Lakota reservation.

The old adage that was popularized in Hollywood westerns," White man speaks with forked tongue" had a special meaning. It denoted the deceit of European settlers who often lied to North American Indian people as they stole coveted lands and nearly decimated them as a people. The recent split tongue approach used in defending Danish racist cartoons as freedom of speech must be loudly condemned as just more attacks on the rights of Muslims to defend their lands, culture and self determination.

Most European and North American newspapers support the editor of, Jyllands-Posten, the first paper to publish the offensively racist cartoons, expressed position, "we cannot apologize for freedom of expression."

The word "but" is a favorite transition of hypocrites who would have us believe on one hand that freedom of speech is a democratic principle to be defended at all cost, while on the other hand are quick to condemn when it attacks and incites hatred toward them and those they wish to protect.

Many "Democratic" European countries have laws against anti-Semitism, which are exclusive; they do not protect other cultures from racial attacks. You can insult the prophet of Islam with offensive cartoon messages that deface his image, to create an atmosphere of hatred for Muslims, but dare not tread on the special rights and protections they have formed laws around to protect anti-Semitism.

For years Abu Hamza al-Masri, an Egyptian Muslim, had exercised his right to free speech at his Finsbury Park mosque in London. The British authorities attempted to revoke his citizenship and for years never brought criminal charges against him. With the new atmosphere created around the global war on terrorism (GWT) an English tribunal recently convicted and sentenced Hamza to seven years in prison for allegedly "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.


Despite the fact that more then 10 people have died as a result of the Danish cartoons there has been no criminal charge laid against the offending papers nor the Danish cartoonist. Some countries say that they are looking for ways to prosecute.The cartoons, which many Danish and Scandinavian newspaper editors defended in the name "radical Islam" predictably, resulted in stirring the anger of the Muslim world, rightly so. In defense, they have taken to the streets in unified protests that will, I hope, send shock waves throughout the European Union for sometime to come.

With all the comparisons that have been made and continue to be made between the struggles of Muslim people and North American Indian people, it did not come as a surprise to find similar cartoons historically used to create racism, hatred and war against American Indians. Portraying the popular sentiment about Indians in the 1800`s. A cartoon by Grant Hamilton, called the, "The Nation's Ward" portrayed the Indian as a savage snake constricting a pioneer family. It shows further the American Indian being fed by Uncle Sam while the pioneers' home burns. This cartoon and others like it protested the U.S. treaty promise of giving out food rations to Indians through hard winters. Political propaganda fed through various printed media has helped to create the mentality that allowed wholesale, systematic and frenetic killings of Indian men, women and children. One example of such an atrocity took place at Sand Creek when Phil Sheridan gave U.S. soldiers permission to butcher women and children and to hang their sexual body parts on public display at the Denver opera house. Such atrocities have occurred in today,s modern wars currently being waged against Muslim people under Bush,s doctrine of ´preemptive strike´ that has killed more civilians then fighters.

More recently, the United States federal government began using the FBI as a national political police force to put down legitimate protest movements of the 1960´s. A program called the counter intelligence program (cointelpro) was developed to assist the FBI. This program used offensive cartoons as a method to fan the flames of racism that had been spoon-fed to the Euro-American public through newspapers, books, cartoons and Hollywood westerns became part of their standard bag of dirty tricks in putting down peaceful protest.

Today, the FBI, with a mad infinity for maintaining the imprisonment of now world famous American Indian activist, Leonard Peltier, not to long ago, used a cartoon posing him as an Indian terrorist killing their fellow agents. This cartoon is still today on their website, despite the fact that even prosecutors who tried the case admit they "do not know who killed the two FBI agents" during the Pine Ridge reign of terror on June 26, 1976. Leonard Peltier has been confined 30 years in federal prisons as a result of FBI manufactured evidence, much of which the federal government has since admitted to.

There is no question that sports teams who use Indian Mascots, cartoons that portray inaccurate images, symbols insulting to American Indians. One professor speaking out against the use of Chief Illiniwek by the U of I football team in the late 1990s, said," "I've often visited Germany and speaking to younger people there, they all feel great pain when they consider the recent past. Not one university in Germany would contemplate having a rabbi as a mascot."

Freedom of speech and of the press has been used as a weapon against oppressed people for centuries. It has been nothing more than a smokescreen to justify the actions of a few but in reality incite religious and ethnic hatred. The editors knew these cartoons were clearly drawn as deadly propaganda tools, created with malice and forethought, to neutralize Muslim groups in struggle and deny them "respectability" in the world community. Who now should be charged for inciting a riot? Who now should be held accountable to the Muslim communities for these slanderous, racist cartoons that has forced communities to take sides against each other? How can we share this world, respecting the diversity of ethnic origins if the powers on hand continue to pump the public with hate filled propaganda! It is time for the media to step up to the plate accepting responsibility for their actions and what better place is there to start than in Denmark!

ROBERT ROBIDEAU is co-director of the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee. He can be reached at: americanindianm@telefonica.net



LINK
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by deafplayer

These days, racism against Muslims is all the rage
i'd day the opposite is true. your stance has become trendy.

just as there is no justifying American and Israeli behaviour on the matter, there's no justifying the violent behaviour of some Muslims.

it's like you can't speak out about any Muslim without some dude jumping on your back and screaming in your ear that the West is at fault.
the West is responsible for its actions, but not those of others.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Actually, I firmly believe that people are victims of circumstance. We have a lot less control over our lives than people would like to think.

Not that I'm excusing certain forms of violent behaviour. Please stop using that card as some sort of valid response.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by docta seuss
i'd day the opposite is true. your stance has become trendy.

just as there is no justifying American and Israeli behaviour on the matter, there's no justifying the violent behaviour of some Muslims.

it's like you can't speak out about any Muslim without some dude jumping on your back and screaming in your ear that the West is at fault.
the West is responsible for its actions, but not those of others.
kind of like when people say Isreal unfairly justifies their ruthless violence with the memory of the holocaust.

we get so used to hearinga bout muslims being oppressed we forget the context. is their oppresion really just the product of western imperialism? is the treatment of muslims in north america really on the level of natives and black slaves as some contend? no way. but being of a milder nature doesnt negate the fact that rascism/religious ignorance exists.

its a question of how legitimate the claims are and how complicit western nations really are in the level of oppression many muslims claim they are victums of non?
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by judge wopner
...is the treatment of muslims in north america really on the level of natives and black slaves as some contend?
That's a pretty unqualified (and vague) statement.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
That's a pretty unqualified (and vague) statement.
i was refering to the article posted by an american native who appeared to have made that comparison and in reference to other people who have made comparisons to our critisms of muslim rioters to black slaves rioting...


how is that vauge and/or unqualified?
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
You say that the "treatment" of muslims in North America is not on the same "level" as compared to the "treatment" of black slaves or natives. This is vague. What sort of treatment? By whom? And what do you mean by "level"?

Some of the comparisons made previously were far more specific, in that they were comparing the response to specific violent acts committed by (what we all agree) were an oppressed group of people. I'd hesitate to make such a generalized statement about the overall treatment of muslims in North America and how it compares to slavery or colonization. I think there are specific attitudes and prejudices that have carried forward as a result of pervasive human behaviours, historical context and so forth.

I mean, more human beings (natives) died* in the colonization of the Western hemisphere, that's for fuck sure. ;)







* I think by "died", I would really like to mean "murdered", but I'll avoid that here.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
You say that the "treatment" of muslims in North America is not on the same "level" as compared to the "treatment" of black slaves or natives. This is vague. What sort of treatment? By whom? And what do you mean by "level"?

Some of the comparisons made previously were far more specific, in that they were comparing the response to specific violent acts committed by (what we all agree) were an oppressed group of people. I'd hesitate to make such a generalized statement about the overall treatment of muslims in North America and how it compares to slavery or colonization. I think there are specific attitudes and prejudices that have carried forward as a result of pervasive human behaviours, historical context and so forth.

I mean, more human beings (natives) died* in the colonization of the Western hemisphere, that's for fuck sure. ;)

* I think by "died", I would really like to mean "murdered", but I'll avoid that here.
ok i see what youre saying, but youve basically taken my
response and put quotes in front of every other word and said
"what you mean by LEVEL?"

you among others made direct comparisons to the perceptions by westerners/americas towards black slaves bevaing violently, and the article i mentioned specifically grouped muslism with natives to suggest some sort of commonality as "oppressed peoples"

im suggesting its a bad comparison, even if both groups qualify for "oppressed status". either way:

many agree with muslim oppression principally because of the isreal situation and wars in mid-east states the were and stilla re being waged by western nations. the problem is there are many non-muslims affected negativley by these conflicts, specfiically the christians of lebanon and syria, and even the few still in iraq.

ive barely heard anyone imply that the war in iraq constitutes christian oppression.

i think many muslims constantly repeat the mantra of oppression, but were the muslims who supported the iraq war helping to oppress muslims or could there have been other reasons outside of religious oppression?

i think whomever posted before was dead on: being hostile towards people who are critical of muslim issues is very trendy and is a deadly trend when we all hope to remain objective.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by judge wopner

i think whomever posted before was dead on: being hostile towards people who are critical of muslim issues is very trendy
I think that comment is pretty intellectually dishonest, actually. It's like saying "your entire life is a 'trend' and therefore you are meaningless..."

Nice, eh?
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
Not that I'm excusing certain forms of violent behaviour. Please stop using that card as some sort of valid response.
your hypocrisy regarding condescension is quite humourous.


that 'card' is a perfectly valid response to the 'cards' you've been playing.
Originally posted by ~atp~

I think that comment is pretty intellectually dishonest, actually. It's like saying "your entire life is a 'trend' and therefore you are meaningless..."

Nice, eh?
uh.. no, it's not. it's like saying that being hostile towards people who are critical of any Muslim is very trendy.

it's not a back-door out of the debate, as though saying that the only reason folks are defending Muslims is because it is trendy.

i was merely expressing frustration, because every time someone says something about a Muslim that could be construed as negative, it's like alarm bells go off, and all of a sudden they find themselves clumped in with deep_groove et al.

speaking of trends, there's another one.
bashing deep_groove, though he often deserves it, is also a trend many tribers are all too happy to be a part of.

he could say 'good tastin' things taste good' and people would immediately pounce on him.


we're a trendy bunch o' mofo's.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
I think that comment is pretty intellectually dishonest, actually. It's like saying "your entire life is a 'trend' and therefore you are meaningless..."

Nice, eh?
ha!!

ok i thikn i see what you mean, though you havent really parlayed that back against what ive been saying,

are you suggesting that your entire life has been anti-western and pro-muslim?

for those who are versed in these issues or have personal experience with muslim oppression or race relations i have a genuine interest in your point of view. this is just how i personally feel about the issue. kind of like how tech stocks were all the rage in 2000. doesnt mean anyone who liked tech stocks were just a follower, but it did make me extra cautious of who i took advice from.

i find far too many people in the west tend to view muslims in some sort of encapsulated bubble which has been shit on for an eternity by the big bad west. i think its a knee jerk reaction to our sympathy for teh under dog rather than an objective analysis of the situation.

i just dont buy that muslims or arabs for that matter are subject to the level of oppression many seem to believe. 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.

sorry im rambling again,
hopefully you see what i mean here.



and htis is a great thread by the way hopefully more comes to the table.

J
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by docta seuss


speaking of trends, there's another one.
bashing deep_groove, though he often deserves it, is also a trend many tribers are all too happy to be a part of.

but deep groove is the SOJU of the politics forum.

:p :p
 
Top