Re: -=- My Views On the Muslim Cartoons -=-
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
My Views Expressed through the mouth of a Middle Eastern Muslim:"We do not like your generalized stereotypical Portraying of Our people, We do not like you showing us as violent fundamentalist ingrates.
So we will rampage the streets, burn down your embassies, and kill 20 people.
Without Forgetting to put a bounty on the cartoonist's head"
not that i condone rioting, but you made up that quote and its irrelevant, since the cartoon was seen as an insult to muhammed, and they go quite apeshit with that sort of thing. the riots had nothing at all to do with negative steriotypes. this thread is officially pointless.
Re: Re: -=- My Views On the Muslim Cartoons -=-
Originally posted by PVS
not that i condone rioting, but you made up that quote and its irrelevant, since the cartoon was seen as an insult to muhammed, and they go quite apeshit with that sort of thing. the riots had nothing at all to do with negative steriotypes. this thread is officially pointless.
Wrong.
Yes I made up that quote. It is after all MY VIEWS.
And everything that I mention DID happen as a result of the cartoons.
It Is also true that it was A Stereotypical Generalized and under a bad light.
What you just said is Udder Crap.
Everything that happened was Because of the Cartoons, and it proved the stereotype right.
Don't go and think that I am Racist or Anti-Muslim Middle east. I'm not. I support there Case, That Cartoon had nothing to do there in the first place, but it is after all FREE SPEECH.
If it was sooo bad, they should have just fired the cartoonist. But Last I herd her got promoted, and now has a price on his head.
Re: Re: Re: -=- My Views On the Muslim Cartoons -=-
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
Wrong.Yes I made up that quote. It is after all MY VIEWS.
then why claim that its an actual quote? never mind.
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
And everything that I mention DID happen as a result of the cartoons.
It Is also true that it was A Stereotypical Generalized and under a bad light.
i never argued that the violence is taking place did i? check my post again, k sunshine? 🙂 and no, it was poking fun at mohommed. have you actually SEEN that cartoon you have such a strong opinion on? the riots went down because these people felt that their savior had been desecrated. i think its a ridiculous way for people to carry on over nothing, but my opinions on rioters is irrelevant here.
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
What you just said is Udder Crap.
no, crap comes from the anus. milk comes from udders. oh you meant utter?
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
Everything that happened was Becasue of the Cartoons, and it prooved the stereotype right.
it only proves that the rioters live up to their stereotypes. should we bash all irish people as violent animals because of the i.r.a.? well, you can but i'm not.
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
Don't go and think that I am Racisit or Anti-Muslim Middle east.
why not? you just declared them all to be violent and living up to their stereotype. so i guess that means you respect vicious rioters?
or did you just realise that not all muslems behave this way and forgot to edit your post? meesa confused. meesa vewy confused
Originally posted by soleran30
I think a bigger question is why did they act that way.............its a disturbing behavior. One mans laughter could and normally does mean another man's tears oh well.
im NOT condoning violence. all i am saying is this:
the editors KNEW it would get a violent reaction, and they
printed it anyway.
if you see a stick of dynamite sitting on the ground, do you light
the fuse because it shouldnt have been there in the first place?
my point is that whether or not the consequence is justifiable is
not a reasonable deciding factor in whether or not to bring the said
consequence about.
yes, the rioters are in-frikin-sane, im not arguing that.
but they are also predictable, and i bet anything that the editors
knew there would be a violent reaction. its a no brainer
I think it is concerning of a grudge against soldiers of Nato. Maybe that happened because of what US soldiers did in Iraq. They are not making war against USA just each other. I was wondering where this civil war gets them to. If the cartoons had been made by Turks, they would care too significantly. However, the reactions could not have been done so violently. I mean it is a grudge from the beginning.
Originally posted by PVS
im NOT condoning violence. all i am saying is this:
the editors KNEW it would get a violent reaction, and they
printed it anyway.if you see a stick of dynamite sitting on the ground, do you light
the fuse because it shouldnt have been there in the first place?my point is that whether or not the consequence is justifiable is
not a reasonable deciding factor in whether or not to bring the said
consequence about.yes, the rioters are in-frikin-sane, im not arguing that.
but they are also predictable, and i bet anything that the editors
knew there would be a violent reaction. its a no brainer
They probably didn't expect such a major uprising and violent backlash from their cartoons. They probably expected some people to get pissed off and complain like some people do when an episode of South Park targets something they believe in, but I honestly doubt that the editors knew that people would be killed as a result of the cartoons.
i disagree
remember when they had the miss universe and the announcer made some off the cuff reference to mohammed and how he'd like to bang the contestants? they went apeshit. not to this magnitude, but certainly not a simple round of pissing and moaning either. i just think it was highly irresponsible given reactions in the past and especially given the already volitale atmosphere over there. like throwing napalm on the fire.
Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
Shut up, you are just putting words in peoples mouths, you are not worth argiong with
i wasnt putting words in his mouth, but rather using linear deduction.
1-the cartoonist depicted how fundamentalists go apeshit over the very thing that they were printing
2-since they are such experts on action/reaction in such a case, as the cartoonist was dead on in his representation as echuu put it, then logic dictates that it was baiting.
im sure they didnt plan on people being killed, but im sure they didnt expect them to just sit there and write a complaint to the editor and leave it at that.