Muslim rage against Denmark. Trade boycotts and burning of flags

[ironduck]

Of course not, I am not a violent person. But some people are known to be, and if you aggitate them, then you can be sure they'll react violently. Doesn't make it right, but it is still reality.

Exactly - it doesn't make it right. You cannot tell people that they 'reap what they sow' when they do something that may upset other people.

Should people in abortion clinics in the US be told that 'they reap what they sow' after they have been shot or bombed by some christian extremist? That is absurd! They did not sow this because what they did was acceptable within a democratic society.

And it's not just about the newspaper (which has been evacuated twice now by bomb threats) - several countries are under various attacks (mostly non-violent so far) even though those countries have nothing to do with the relevant independent newspapers. Those countries and their citizens did not 'sow' anything in particular, they are just being punished out of sheer hatred and ignorance.

I just read that an al-Sadr group in Iraq is now asking the Vatican to put Denmark right 'or else..'.

The Vatican? Denmark is oficially lutheran-protestant. I wonder if the muslims in Denmark should also be 'put straight'..?

 

[sysyphus]

What exactly is your point then? The newspapers are within their rights and the protesters have gone way too far. Do you really see it any other way?

I see it exactly as you state here, but tempered with the fact that they ought to have known that by exercising that right in that way that the reaction would at least be somewhat like what we have seen. Justified or not, that's the reaction that was pretty much inevitable.

There are better ways to have dealt with the issue. Is it THAT important to have a picture of Mohammed on the front of a book that it's worth a battle like this? Could they have not taken their concerns to the local muslim community and discussed the issue like rational adults?

A muslim colleague of mine is soon retiring and has told me that he wants to devote his newfound free time to working with young muslim boys to help steer them away from extremism. This incident has now made his noble goal that much more difficult.

Ultimately, that is my point.

P.S. - I'm surprised you take offense at my attempt to improve your English. Now you have learned something, and after all, isn't that a good thing?

Because if you're going to improve my language skills, my french could use more work.

 

[sysyphus]

And it's not just about the newspaper (which has been evacuated twice now by bomb threats) - several countries are under various attacks (mostly non-violent so far) even though those countries have nothing to do with the relevant independent newspapers. Those countries and their citizens did not 'sow' anything in particular, they are just being punished out of sheer hatred and ignorance.

Again, read my original post. I sympathise with the pligth of the innocent victims in this. My comment was directed only at those who published the drawings.

And I apologise that my original response to you was so snarky. I believe in the point I made, but I could have been more polite about it, I admit that.

 

[GenMarshall]

Whoh, Talk about the Muslums getting all uptight about their prophet being on a comic .

 

[ironduck]

Sysyphus,

Well, the thing is that it really was a domestic issue here, whether you believe that or not. Islam and muslim immigrants is a big topic in this country and it's constantly in the newspapers. People who perform publicly with various works feel they need to self-censor because they will otherwise be persecuted by fundamentalist muslims. We have several politicians - also moderate muslim ones - that are under police protection because of threats from fundamentalists.

So it's not surprising that a newspaper wants to break this self censorship that is born out of fear. It does not serve a democratic country to be in fear of exercising its democratic rights.

Many people disagree with the specific approach, me included, but it's also becoming clear that the image that muslims feel was wrongly depicted (of islam as a violent religion) is coming true. The irony is that most of the drawings poke more fun of the Danish debate and the newspaper than they do of muslims.

Something else that is not being mentioned much is that jews and Israel is often satirized in Arab newspapers. Yet, many muslims ignore that and instead say 'what if we did this to Jesus?' Well, we already did that to Jesus a long time ago, and much more so! In quite funny ways, even. So far, there has been no jihad on Monty Python.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

I see it exactly as you state here, but tempered with the fact that they ought to have known that by exercising that right in that way that the reaction would at least be somewhat like what we have seen. Justified or not, that's the reaction that was pretty much inevitable.

There are better ways to have dealt with the issue. Is it THAT important to have a picture of Mohammed on the front of a book that it's worth a battle like this? Could they have not taken their concerns to the local muslim community and discussed the issue like rational adults?

A muslim colleague of mine is soon retiring and has told me that he wants to devote his newfound free time to working with young muslim boys to help steer them away from extremism. This incident has now made his noble goal that much more difficult.

Ultimately, that is my point.

This is an excellent point, with the conflict being between the exercise of free speech and admittedly poor and disrespectful taste and not exercising your free speech and risking losing it due to censorship (self or otherwise). It's not an easy issue. Newspaper editors tend to err on the side of printing what they want and if you're offended so be it. People like your Muslim colleague are indeed the real solution.

I just saw your "reap what you sow" comment as some effort to justify the totally unjustifiable violence now occurring to innocent people that had nothing to do with printing any cartoons.

Because if you're going to improve my language skills, my french could use more work.

Sadly, I am the American stereotype rightfully mocked by multi-lingual Europeans, and was only taught one language and am unable to offer assistance with your French.

 

[MattII]

Normally I'm a tolerant person, but all this get-up over a few cartoons, that probably wouldn't even raise eyebrows if done against the catholics, is driving me to say to all the protestors, 'if you don't like our culture, get the hell out of the country.'

 

[ironduck]

Normally I'm a tolerant person, but all this get-up over a few cartoons, that probably wouldn't even raise eyebrows if done against the catholics, is driving me to say to all the protestors, 'if you don't like our culture, get the hell out of the country.'

When the cartoons were first published here there was a peaceful demonstration by muslims against them. Although I found it an overreaction, I do think it's within their right to be upset and to express that publicly. The christians have done that several times before for similar reasons.

The problems only occurred later when the fundamentalists went touring to non-democratic countries.

 

[Comraddict]

Denmark was avid muslim supporter during Balkan wars in 90s. Many muslims immigrated to Denmark at that times. What a irony.

 

[HannibalBarka]

You guys don't get it. There are two kinds of people like there are two kinds of nations: the first group Hit when offended the other Talk .
Some Muslims in the ME because they felt offended reacted in a violent manner, other Muslims protested peacefully. Nations acts the same way: For example let say some countries get offended by let say Iraq. Well some are going to react peacefully and talk and negotiate through the UN etc, like for example France and Germany, those are the nice guys. Other react in an un-civilized manner and declare war like you know who I am talking about

 

[GenMarshall]

Normally I'm a tolerant person, but all this get-up over a few cartoons, that probably wouldn't even raise eyebrows if done against the catholics, is driving me to say to all the protestors, 'if you don't like our culture, get the hell out of the country.'

If the cartoon has an anti-Catholic and anti-Pope message, then us Catholics will raise an eyebrow .

 

[HannibalBarka]

If the cartoon has an anti-Catholic and anti-Pope message, then us Catholics will raise an eyebrow .

Well I know about Catholic who put a bomb in a parisian cinema because they were showing Scorse's "The Last Temptation of Christ"

 

[Verbose]

Just curious:

How many people debating the issue here have actually been following the Danish domestic debate over Islam and Muslim immigration in the last five or six years or so?

It's been very interesting...

Someone recently described the gradual increase in agressiveness towards Muslims in the Danish Islam-debate as a case of "semantic speed-blindness".

I can't really say I find it illogical that Denmark has become the focus of Muslim anger here.

 

[ironduck]

I can't really say I find it illogical that Denmark has become the focus of Muslim anger here.

As disgusting some of the views and policies that have been brought out in Denmark is I strongly doubt the people demonstrating in islamic countries are aware of any of that.

Or perhaps that's why they also burnt down the Norwegian embassy? Or that's why they are kidnapping people from other countries?

The vast majority of the angered people in the islamic countries have no idea of domestic Danish policy, they have enough trouble telling the countries apart! Did you not notice that Sweden was also being attacked even though they had nothing to do with it? Demonstraters burnt Dutch flags thinking they were French for crying out loud!

You sound like what you're really saying is that 'Denmark had it coming'.

 

[GenMarshall]

I just read that an al-Sadr group in Iraq is now asking the Vatican to put Denmark right 'or else..'.

The Vatican? Denmark is oficially lutheran-protestant. I wonder if the muslims in Denmark should also be 'put straight'..?

Last time I checked, Denmark has a Protestant Majority so the Vatican cant do anything.

On the topic about the Vatican, I stumbled uppon an artcle stating that they denounce the cartoons. No word yet from the pope.

Vatican cardinal criticizes cartoons satirizing prophet Mohammed

ROME (CNS) – A Vatican cardinal sharply criticized the publication of newspaper cartoons satirizing the prophet Mohammed, saying the caricatures have offended the religious sentiments of millions of Muslims.

Cardinal Achille Silvestrini, a leader for many years in the Vatican's diplomatic service, said the cartoons demonstrated a growing trend to make fun of religious symbols in general.

"Freedom of satire that offends the sentiments of others becomes an abuse -- and in this case it has affected the sentiments of entire populations in their highest symbols," the cardinal told the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera Feb. 3.

The cardinal said Christianity has similar sensitivities.

"One can understand satire about a priest but not about God. With reference to Islam, we could understand satire on the uses and customs and behavior, but not about the Quran, Allah and the Prophet," he said.

The cardinal said secular societies should not assume a right to offend religious sentiments. He noted that many countries consider it illegal to offend their national flag and asked, "Shouldn't we consider religious symbols on an equal level with the symbols of secular institutions?"

The cartoons first appeared in a Danish newspaper last fall and have recently been reprinted in several European newspapers as a gesture of free speech, amid growing criticism in the Muslim world. Several protest demonstrations have been held in Muslim countries; in Indonesia Feb. 3 the Danish Embassy was overrun and damaged by angry militants.

The cartoons are considered blasphemous because, first of all, Islam does not allow depictions of Mohammed, and, second, they show Mohammed in a number of disrespectful ways. One cartoon, for example, shows Mohammed in a turban shaped as a bomb.

Msgr. Aldo Giordano, general secretary of the Council of European Bishops' Conferences, told Vatican Radio Feb. 3 that this type of satire was a type of vulgarity that goes against human rights.

"I see that the entire Christian world is very saddened and pained by satire of this type, aimed at the brothers of another religion," he said.

At the same time, he said it was important not to overreact and "not make it an occasion for a clash of civilizations."

"We should be able to transform offenses in an occasion of greater solidarity," he said.

Article Source

 

[ironduck]

Last time I checked, Denmark has a Protestant Majority so the Vatican cant do anything.

Yes, that was part of my point. However, even if we were talking about Italy or Poland the Vatican still would not be able to do squat. The fundamentalists have no idea about the political systems here, however. At some point there were cries for the king of Denmark to apologize (it's actually a queen and she holds no political power).

 

[Verbose]

You sound like what you're really saying is that 'Denmark had it coming'.

Comparing the tenor of the public debate of Islam in various European countries it tends to stick out of the crowd at least.

And part of the shock to Danish politicians seems to have been the realization that the Big Bad World isn't Over There on the outside, while we are safe and snugg on the inside of Demark, but it turned out it's actually Over Here with us.

I find it entirely possible that enough people, in the right positions, in the ME know what's being said in Denmark and what laws are being passed. Do you really think Denmark passes entirely under the radar? Especially as it's part of Bush's "coalition of the willing"?
(Not looking particularily big and mean compared to the US or UK might have emboldened the protesters as well.)

And Fogh-Rasmussen's decision to add insult to injury by not receiving the Muslim ambassdors has been interpreted as a clever move within Danish domestic politics (giving Muslims the time of day can be construed as weakness by your opponents), while at the same time no one was expecting that behaviour to have any effect on Danish international politics, where being rude to Muslims isn't a winning ticket.

I.e. it seems Danish foreign and domestic policies with regards to Muslims might be drifting apart, as Denmark in international diplomacy is also drifting away from the conservative course (bunching up in the middle not to attract attention perhaps?) of other European nations.

So, for arguments sake, let's say I'm debating with myself if the way the political game has been played for a while with regards to Islam and Muslim immigration didn't help set Denmark up for this?
(Clearly the cartoons alone are just too trivial to really trigger something like this.)

I'm assuming we can have a heated little debate over whether, compared with Denmark, other nations — especially those to the north — are just craven cowards pampering to Muslim whims or not.

So again, for arguments sake, let's say Swedes are gutless fools by comparison.
It still leaves the question what the point of the high level of aggressiveness in domestic Danish debate over Islam has been all along? Which escapes me.
And whether it has been worth the trouble or not? Which I have no way of assessing from the outside.

But I tend to get the impression that these things might on some levels have more to do with what it means to be Danish than what it means to be Muslim?

 

[ironduck]

Verbose, I have to say I get a little tired reading your tirades. You are mixing up a lot of issues from what appears to be a clear agenda of yours. I'll try to clear up a few things here.

I find it entirely possible that enough people, in the right positions, in the ME know what's being said in Denmark and what laws are being passed.

Do you have any idea about the reality of the countries you are talking about? They are dictatorships! The least problematic of the countries in the region have almost no democratic tradition and are largely authoritarian. The worst are incredibly dangerous places to live in if you dissent in opinion. What happens in Denmark is nothing compared to the horror that takes place in the Arab countries! Do you really think the dictators there give a crap about human rights issues in Denmark? Of course not, they care about maintaining power and when they find a way to channel the anger of their populations toward another target than themselves they are joyous to do so.

Do you really think Denmark passes entirely under the radar? Especially as it's part of Bush's "coalition of the willing"?

Denmark's domestic and foreign policies are two different things. You may agree or disagree with the war in Iraq, and what is done presently to improve the situation there, but to mess it up with domestic policy regarding immigrants shows a real lack of understanding of Danish politics.

And Fogh-Rasmussen's decision to add insult to injury by not receiving the Muslim ambassdors has been interpreted as a clever move within Danish domestic politics (giving Muslims the time of day can be construed as weakness by your opponents), while at the same time no one was expecting that behaviour to have any effect on Danish international politics, where being rude to Muslims isn't a winning ticket.

Really? So that is why the political opposition from the beginning strongly criticized Fogh Rasmussen's decision? So that's why many newspapers and debaters strongly criticized his decision? It's clear that you are being fed wrong information.

For the record, what the 11 ambassadors asked for was that the Danish government should punish Jyllands-Posten (the offending newspaper). Fogh Rasmussen declined to meet with them because of this demand. But it was not interpreted as a 'clever' move by anyone, rather it was interpreted as stubborn and foolish by some, and as neccessary by others because of the ridiculous demands by the 11 ambassadors. They were interviewed extensively when they made their request for a meeting and they consistently asked for the government to punish the newspaper. These ambassadors were from countries with dictatorships and they made demands that are normal in their own countries (except for Turkey, who were in terrible company), but outrageous in democratic countries.

I.e. it seems Danish foreign and domestic policies with regards to Muslims might be drifting apart, as Denmark in international diplomacy is also drifting away from the conservative course (bunching up in the middle not to attract attention perhaps?) of other European nations.

Denmark has played an active role in international politics for quite a while. The current roadmap for peace between Israel and Palestine was largely a Danish construction, for instance. Of course, you don't see many people in Gaza protesting that, now do you?

(Clearly the cartoons alone are just too trivial to really trigger something like this.)

Nevertheless, the cartoons are what people are demonstrating about all over the muslim world! This is what they know about, this is what they protest against! Not Danish domestic policy, as wrong as that may be from your perspective (where I actually agree with you in part, but you are unable to separate the issues).

It still leaves the question what the point of the high level of aggressiveness in domestic Danish debate over Islam has been all along? Which escapes me.
And whether it has been worth the trouble or not? Which I have no way of assessing from the outside.

The agressiveness (which takes place in a considerably more nuanced debate than you seem to think) stems from a racist right wing party which has enough voters behind it to push the government into hard line policies. Pursuing such policies is never worth it for the simple reason that people should be treated properly.

Mind you, part of the reason that such a party can gain popularity is due to fundamentalist muslims that encourage violence against jews (Hizb-ut-Tahrir - a muslim organization which is prohibited in many European countries but legal in Denmark), that attack moderate muslim politicians, that on public television state that women who dress like westerners deserve to be raped (imam Abu Laban), and that tour the dictatorships of the middle east to stir up hatred against Denmark. These are but a few examples of why a conflict escalates within a country.

But I tend to get the impression that these things might on some levels have more to do with what it means to be Danish than what it means to be Muslim?

I couldn't care less about what it means to be Danish. I'm interested in people treating each other properly, without violence, without threats, without deportations of refugees, and without hidden agendas.

 

[sysyphus]

I just saw your "reap what you sow" comment as some effort to justify the totally unjustifiable violence now occurring to innocent people that had nothing to do with printing any cartoons.

Admittedly, that was a bad choice of words.

 

[Alone]

Denmark was avid muslim supporter during Balkan wars in 90s. Many muslims immigrated to Denmark at that times. What a irony.

yep, as they say in my fatherland:
"The one who sow the pumpkins together with the devil, get that pumpkin later on crashed on his head".