Prophet Muhammad Cartoon.

[S]

How many churches did they destroy and how many christians did they kill unpunishedly in Bulgaria and Serbia during the last 16 years?And we did nothing to them for serious offences, but they are inclined to make a "jihad" for a few pictures :!:

hmmm... no need to worry, there is the crusade which will protect you from a jihad

 

[Wooz]

Was Ist! Was Ist! Was Ist!

*cheerleader dance*

 

[Flop]

Now, this is funny, unlike the ones they showed in Jyllandsposten.

 

[alec]

Does anyone know Father Tucker the Child F***er?
Now that's how you make fun of religion.

 

[welsh]

More silliness-

Seriously, what is it with Muslims? No sense of humor?

form msnbc

BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hundreds of thousands of Shiite Muslims transformed a religious ceremony in Lebanon on Thursday into an emotional but peaceful protest against cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

“Defending the prophet should continue worldwide,” Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, told the crowd. “Let (U.S. Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice, (President) Bush and all the tyrants shut up: We are a nation that can’t forgive, be silent or ease up when they insult our prophet and our sacred values.”

Go Muslim Nationalism! Hoorah!
What an asshole.

Seriously, if you can't live in a world where people can think for themselves, than please get out of ours.

“Today, we are defending the dignity of our prophet with a word, a demonstration but let George Bush and the arrogant world know that if we have to ... we will defend our prophet with our blood, not our voices,” Nasrallah added.

Whacko

You must all die for Allah so that the great Mohammad is not insulted by Charlie Brown, the facist capitalist infidel swine!
- what a dick.

Rice on Wednesday accused Iran and Syria, both backers of Hezbollah and at loggerheads with the West, of deliberately stoking rage among Muslims.

Bush urged governments to stop the violence, including attacks on Western diplomatic missions in parts of the Muslim world.

Considering any portrayal of their prophet as blasphemous, angry Muslims have demonstrated around the world over the cartoons, first published in Denmark, then Norway and several other countries in Europe and elsewhere. At least a dozen people have died as police broke up several protests.

Nasrallah said there would be no compromise before Denmark apologizes and the European Parliament and individual assemblies in Europe pass laws that prohibit insulting the Prophet.

The European Union, meanwhile, sought to calm tension, calling for a voluntary media code of conduct to avoid inflaming religious sensibilities.

Fuck that. I mean stand by your values. It's free speech vs a religious immunity?

You can speak your mind... provided you say nothing bad about Allah, because if you do, you are a filthy Jew and belong in hell as we rape your women......

Danish travel warning
Unlike a protest on Sunday that turned into a riot in which the building housing the Danish consulate was torched, there were no signs of violence in the march in Beirut’s southern suburb, a Hezbollah stronghold.

ANd why not?

Because Hezbollah wants to show competence?

Lebanon has charged 203 people, mostly Lebanese but also Syrians and Palestinians, with taking part in the Sunday riots and promised swift trials.

But Denmark advised its citizens to leave Lebanon, fearing more protests in coming days.

“All travel to Lebanon is discouraged. All Danes are urged to leave the country. Danes should remain indoors until arrangements to leave the country can be made,” the Foreign Ministry said in a warning issued on Thursday.

Despite wind and rain, there was a high turnout at Thursday's protest -- put by security sources at more than 400,000, and by Hezbollah at 700,000. The march is an annual event to mark Ashura, when Shiites mourn the death of the prophet’s grandson, Imam Hussein, killed in Karbala in Iraq 1,300 years ago.

Seriously, this folks have got to realize that if it wasn't for the oil, no one would give a flying fuck about them

For example- see Africa.

Organized violence?
In Afghanistan, where three days of riots left more than 10 people dead, U.S. military spokesman Col. James Yonts said the United States and other countries are examining whether extremist groups incited the violence.

“Other countries are having the same demonstrations, same problems — very violent demonstrations, starting peaceful, turning violent,” Yonts said when asked if al-Qaida and the Taliban may have been involved.

He said the United States and other countries would look to see “if this is something larger than just a small demonstration — if there is a tie to it, if there is an infrastructure, a connection to it.”

Zahor Afghan, the editor of Erada, Afghanistan’s most respected newspaper, said he felt there was definite incitement.

“No media in Afghanistan has published or broadcast pictures of these cartoons. The radio has been reporting on it, but there are definitely people using this to incite violence against the presence of foreigners in Afghanistan,” he said.

Opportunities increase when you have a population willing to eat this ideological nonsense.

No surprises here- It worked for W too.

"Sometimes its' hard...
to be a gay cowboy...
Given all your love
To just one ranch hand."

Background to the controversy
The cartoons were first published on Sept. 30 in a Danish Daily, The Jyllands-Posten. Several days later, a coalition of Muslims in Denmark demanded a meeting with the country’s Culture Ministry to protest the drawings, but the ministry refused.

The Muslim coalition turned to foreign embassies, and then went on a tour of the Muslim and Arab world between December and January to call attention to the cartoons. Soon after, newspapers around the world began republishing the drawings and the issue returned to the spotlight.

Newspapers have argued that publishing the cartoons is a matter of free speech, but many Muslims find that argument hard to believe.

In related developments reported Thursday:

Two staff at a university in the United Arab Emirates were sacked after one of them, an American, made copies of the cartoons in an attempt to spur debate among her students. Her colleague, a British man, was fired when he defended her.
A Malaysian daily reported on Thursday that the government had decided to suspend the publishing license of the Sarawak Tribune newspaper for publishing the caricatures last weekend apparently to illustrate a story on the global outrage.
The directors of two Algerian television channels were also sacked for showing the cartoons during news coverage.
Reuters and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Oh Gawd! like we can't really be allowed to laugh, can we?

 

[Jebus]

Some of you people are acting just as bad as they are.


Stop acting in this 'we vs. them' manner, for cryin' out loud. Put things in perspective, try some emphaty, and stop generalizing. You're doing the same things you're blaiming them for.

 

[Brother None]

Stop acting in this 'we vs. them' manner, for cryin' out loud. Put things in perspective, try some emphaty, and stop generalizing. You're doing the same things you're blaiming them for.

Aaaand the let's-surrender mentality pops up again.

How about *before* I put things in perspective and try some empathy, they apologize for all the flags they've burned, all the Jews they've insulted and all the rest? They simply have no right to scream that the Denmark should apologize when Denmark isn't even responsible for what it's newspapers print.

And how 'bout they stop violating international treaties by failing to safe-guard the dignity and safety of their embassies? Shit.

This is one case when perspective is an awfully bad thing to have.

 

[Per]

I agree with Kharn here. An argument I'm hearing an awful lot now is that "Sure, freedom of speech is great, you can have that, but this is such an affront that it shouldn't be covered by it." But that's just saying there shouldn't be freedom of speech, because it only really has any value when it's being tested. The right to say or print only that which everyone wants you to say or print is not a right at all. Give these people a finger and they'll take a mile.

 

[welsh]

Fuck'n A!

Free Speech!!

 

[Lazarus Plus]

I find it amusing how the Muslim people are collectively pissing away much of the good will generated for their "plight" in the West. (Not that I don't think they deserve SOME sympathy, but really, it gets extreme)

When you take an attitude so contrary to the cultures of the West, this is bound to happen, idiots. Hopefully some of them might get it into their head that tolerance breeds respect, not contempt.

 

[Jebus]

Stop acting in this 'we vs. them' manner, for cryin' out loud. Put things in perspective, try some emphaty, and stop generalizing. You're doing the same things you're blaiming them for.

Aaaand the let's-surrender mentality pops up again.

How about *before* I put things in perspective and try some empathy, they apologize for all the flags they've burned, all the Jews they've insulted and all the rest? They simply have no right to scream that the Denmark should apologize when Denmark isn't even responsible for what it's newspapers print.

And how 'bout they stop violating international treaties by failing to safe-guard the dignity and safety of their embassies? Shit.

This is one case when perspective is an awfully bad thing to have.

Look, this is starting to get on my nerves.

Did you see me saying that burning flags and anti-semetism is a good thing? I think not. Did you hear me say that they are relative evils? I think not.

The point is that there are more than one billion - MORE THAN ONE BILLION muslims out there. In all the protests the news has reported of, none has been bigger than a couple of (tens of) thousand people. And in the flag- and embassy burning, only dozens of people are involved. That leaves about 999 900 000 muslims that have absolutely no fucking thing to do with burning shit, but that *are* hurt by a dumb Danish cartoonist with an aweful sense of humour. Yet, most of you are running around now - not only on these boards, but in real life too - gloating about how they were right about the fact that 'all muslims are savages' and we should just kick that 'race' of religious extremists out of our country and nuke their lands. And, frankly, you people are pretty fucking ass-retarded. You remind me of the cretin peasants that say soccer should be outlawed because 'all soccer fans are hooligans', or that 'le jeunesse d'aujour'hui ne sont que des crapules'. Go take your right-wing asinine propaganda somewhere else, racist dimwits.

 

[Montez]

stuff

So your response to us is basically the same as our response to them? I can sympathize with your reaction, but you can't pretend that you're enlightened, empathetic, have a greater perspective and are standing on the moral high ground when you're down here hurling shit with the rest of us.

 

[Brother None]

The point is that there are more than one billion - MORE THAN ONE BILLION muslims out there. In all the protests the news has reported of, none has been bigger than a couple of (tens of) thousand people.

By comparison, 12 Danish cartoonist drew those cartoons, yet all the Danish people are under fire.

Tell me, how am I obliged to be reasonable about it, then? Why is it their right to condemn the West over the actions of the few and not ours?

Besides which, Jebus, your islamo-apologist attitudes fails to facture in that the resistance against these shouting muslims within the muslim world is a tiny fraction. The huge silent majority has to be considered to be supporting the assholes one the street, they're not stopping them.

Or do you think the Danish boycot was so successful because of those few people on the street? Nobody was buying Danish anymore. Nobody. Use. Your. Head.

Besides which, whether I blame all muslims or not is irrelevant, relevant is that actual nationstates are pressuring the EU to pass anti-free speech laws, that they are demanding an apology for exercising the freedom of speech, that embassies are burning. Shouting "bigot" is cute, but doesn't actually make for a valid defence to those very real problems.

 

[Kahgan]

I don't understand why everyone is going on about this freedom of speech vs muslims thing, because this has nothing at all to do with freedom of speech. I bet the cartoonist didn't even think the words "freedom of speech" (or "ytringsfrihed" as it probably is in danish) the drawings were made as a provocation and a boast. "Lookie here, we DARE to insult the muslims, how cool are we, huh?" The freedom of speech thing is so ingrown in the western world that people don't think about it when they do stuff like this. (not saying it's a bad thing.)
Please get this into your heads: THIS WAS NOT A DEMONSTRATION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
And it has nothing what so ever to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is just a fucking clicheè that everyone start whining about when someone has said or done something insulting towards other people for no legit reason at all, wich makes it stupid.

And however wierd it may sound, I wholeheartedly agree with Jebus.

EDIT: I edited while you posted, Kharn, so if it confused you, sorry

 

[Brother None]

Please get this into your heads: THIS WAS NOT A DEMONSTRATION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH!

Of course not. How odd is that. "A demonstration of freedom of speech"? What the hell is that? Open provocation, maybe. Who cares?

They *were* provocative cartoons, true, and at that point nobody cared about them until that mulla took them to the Middle East.

Then people began shouting about tearing down the wall. How the government should forbid such cartoons. That would be a direct infringement on freedom of speech.

I don't care why they were originally printed. They're not libel, they're not incitement to hate, they're a-ok in any free speech law in a civilized country, so fuck them for not having a sense of humour. QED.

 

[Montez]

Please get this into your heads: THIS WAS NOT A DEMONSTRATION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH!

It was indeed a demonstration of freedom of speech, as is everything like it - it's just so common and taken for granted that no one views it in terms of a "demonstration" anymore except for academics. It just wasn't an important or noticible one until the muslim world went beserk over it and demanded apologies and censorship.

 

[Jebus]

So your response to us is basically the same as our response to them? I can sympathize with your reaction, but you can't pretend that you're enlightened, empathetic, have a greater perspective and are standing on the moral high ground when you're down here hurling shit with the rest of us.

I didn't hurl shit towards them. I asked myself how exactly that cartoonist was a blasphemer by portraying Mohammed.

That said, I did hurl shit toward the guys that set those embassies ablaze IRL. But I don't consider every muslim responsible for that, not the vast silent majority of other muslims living abroad, not the muslim that proverbially lives nextdoor.

The point is that there are more than one billion - MORE THAN ONE BILLION muslims out there. In all the protests the news has reported of, none has been bigger than a couple of (tens of) thousand people.

By comparison, 12 Danish cartoonist drew those cartoons, yet all the Danish people are under fire.

That was my point. By generalizing and calling all muslims violent embassy-burning, priest-shooting and aggressive-slogan toting maniacs some of us are acting just as bad as them.

Tell me, how am I obliged to be reasonable about it, then? Why is it their right to condemn the West over the actions of the few and not ours?

They have no right to do that whatsoever. But does that give us the right to do that? Do two wrongs make a right?

If I remember correctly, you used to be a bigger man and acknowledge the principle of 'two wrongs don't make a right' too. Something must've changed.

Besides which, Jebus, your islamo-apologist attitudes fails to facture in that the resistance against these shouting muslims within the muslim world is a tiny fraction. The huge silent majority has to be considered to be supporting the assholes one the street, they're not stopping them.

We're not stopping racists publishing cartoons like that either. We're not condemning islamaphoby and the hurting of peoples' beliefs either.

Of course, that cartoonist had every legal right to publish that cartoon. Just like those muslims that protested peacefully had every legal right to do that too. Yet, you cannot expect the silent majority of muslims to condemn those protests morally when we don't condemn people publishing cartoons of that kind either.

That said, I don't see why the silent majority should morally condemn those protesting in the first place. They have every moral right to protest - if it were the other way around, I'd be protesting too. They were hurt in their deepest beliefs, and all the West first reactions were knee-jerk actions like 'Hey, EVERYBODY should publish those cartoons! That'd teach them!'

Sadly, colonial times are over. You can't get away with stuff like that anymore. Media is read around the entire world, so you can't expect to be able to publish something that offends peoples beliefs so severely and not get any protest.

Or do you think the Danish boycot was so successful because of those few people on the street? Nobody was buying Danish anymore. Nobody. Use. Your. Head.

What's wrong with the boycott? It's their godgiven right to buy anything they damn well please. As I said before, colonial times are over.
Are people (such as me) boycotting certain products to protest against pollution, exploition and childlabour doing something wrong too, then?
And if you're alluding to the 'generalizing' aspect - I've already covered that before. Them holding the Danish government and all Danish people responsible for the cartoons that newspaper published is indeed nonsense, but some people here calling all muslims savages because some are burning embassies is just as much nonsense.

Besides which, whether I blame all muslims or not is irrelevant, relevant is that actual nationstates are pressuring the EU to pass anti-free speech laws, that they are demanding an apology for exercising the freedom of speech, that embassies are burning.

As I said before, I never approved of those actions. I'm not here to defend that, for cryin' out loud. Don't stuff words into my mouth.

Shouting "bigot" is cute, but doesn't actually make for a valid defence to those very real problems.

Shouting out those very real problems is cute, but that doesn't make for a valid defence for bigotry.

 

[Brother None]

They have no right to do that whatsoever. But does that give us the right to do that? Do two wrongs make a right?

Not really, but currently EU governments are under pressure to push forward anti-free speech regulations, pressure from muslim nations. This is a simple issue of us-vs-them, free spreech vs. religious intolerance.

I never called them savages, for all due reference.

We're not condemning islamaphoby and the hurting of peoples' beliefs either.

Islamophobia we are condemning. You did outlaw the Vlaams Blok, remember? But there are limits to infringing on people's rights just to protect other people. Insulting religions falls outside of what can be justified to oppress.

Just like those muslims that protested peacefully had every legal right to do that too. Yet, you cannot expect the silent majority of muslims to condemn those protests morally when we don't condemn people publishing cartoons of that kind either.

That said, I don't see why the silent majority should morally condemn those protesting in the first place. They have every moral right to protest - if it were the other way around, I'd be protesting too. They were hurt in their deepest beliefs, and all the West first reactions were knee-jerk actions like 'Hey, EVERYBODY should publish those cartoons! That'd teach them!'

Really? I'm supposed to think that the silent majority thinking it's a-ok for their brethren on the street to yell "death to the infidels" and burn flags of other nations? There's a *slight* difference between that and the cartoons, because the protesting counts as incitement to hate and agression and thus falls outside of free speech laws.

See, this isn't peaceful protest, that's a misnomer. This is non-violent protest, but it definitely isn't peaceful.

Hell, hardly any of the protests going on are really non-violent, come to that, so that's a misnomer too.

Sadly, colonial times are over.

Heh.

Media is read around the entire world, so you can't expect to be able to publish something that offends peoples beliefs so severely and not get any protest.

Actually, you can, the Danish cartoons passed by without a cough or a nod or a stir in Denmark until some asshole imam took it over to the muslims and spread the word there. Incitement to violence, anyone?

What's wrong with the boycott? It's their godgiven right to buy anything they damn well please.

Yes and no. We live in a free-market controlled world, remember. Boycotting anything is now a political means. It's also the US' godgiven right to buy anything it pleases, including not buying Cuban products, but would you say they're not making a political statement by doing so

The boycots are there, widely carried and government-supported. That means it's a means of political leverage against free speech.

Are people (such as me) boycotting certain products to protest against pollution, exploition and childlabour doing something wrong too, then?

Depends on whether or not you think pollution, exploition and childlabour are values to be held on the same level as freedom of speech.

You're really bad at making analogues comparisons, Jebus.

And if you're alluding to the 'generalizing' aspect - I've already covered that before. Them holding the Danish government and all Danish people responsible for the cartoons that newspaper published is indeed nonsense, but some people here calling all muslims savages because some are burning embassies is just as much nonsense.

Yes. And? We're not boycotting Saudi products. We're not calling a ban on all Middle Eastern products. We're not calling for them to be beheaded. We're not pressuring them to publish the cartoons too.

The difference between the two attitudes is so wide, Jebus.

What I don't understand is why in Frith's name you think we should be the first to yield. You're almost saying we're in the wrong here, that we started it. Fuck that. This is a stand-off in values, free speech versus religious intolerance, and you're basically walking around saying "Ho-hum, we shouldn't be so mean to them." What the hell? Then what? We should stop being mean? We should surrender our freedom of speech because they feel slightly miffed?

Shouting out those very real problems is cute, but that doesn't make for a valid defence for bigotry.

No, it doesn't.

So where's the bigotry?

Muslim countries are pressuring the EU to pass anti-free speech laws - fact
Muslim countries allowed for the burning of embassies they have a sworn duty to defend - fact
No major upcry from any muslim organisation has been heared in protest of the "Death to all Infidels"-statements of cartoonhaters - fact

Where's the bigotry? You're like a Jew shouting "anti-Semite!" whenever someone criticizes Israel. It may be true sporadically, but sometimes criticism is valid. Drop the typical European islamo-apologetic attitude and think for a moment.

 

[Jebus]

They have no right to do that whatsoever. But does that give us the right to do that? Do two wrongs make a right?

Not really, but currently EU governments are under pressure to push forward anti-free speech regulations, pressure from muslim nations. This is a simple issue of us-vs-them, free spreech vs. religious intolerance.

Then call the government of those nations 'savage'. I sure as hell do.

I never called them savages, for all due reference.

I know, I wasn't really talking to you in that post. I was talking a second person plural. They know who they are.

We're not condemning islamaphoby and the hurting of peoples' beliefs either.

Islamophobia we are condemning. You did outlaw the Vlaams Blok, remember? But there are limits to infringing on people's rights just to protect other people. Insulting religions falls outside of what can be justified to oppress.

See, I know that. I'm not calling for any anti-free speech laws, just like you (I hope) aren't calling for anti-protests laws in Islamic countries. It's a matter of moral and ethics - I believe in free speech, but I do not believe in 'open' speech. There should be moral boundaries to what one may publish in the press - not neccesairily bound by law, but press agencies should regulate themselves in matters like this.
In this case, they did so in the US - oddly enough. They knew publishing stuff like that is morally reprehensible, and they didn't do it. Not because any law was forcing them, but because of good old human decency.

Just like those muslims that protested peacefully had every legal right to do that too. Yet, you cannot expect the silent majority of muslims to condemn those protests morally when we don't condemn people publishing cartoons of that kind either.

That said, I don't see why the silent majority should morally condemn those protesting in the first place. They have every moral right to protest - if it were the other way around, I'd be protesting too. They were hurt in their deepest beliefs, and all the West first reactions were knee-jerk actions like 'Hey, EVERYBODY should publish those cartoons! That'd teach them!'

Really? I'm supposed to think that the silent majority thinking it's a-ok for their brethren on the street to yell "death to the infidels" and burn flags of other nations?

I don't get how you deducted that from what I said.

Media is read around the entire world, so you can't expect to be able to publish something that offends peoples beliefs so severely and not get any protest.

Actually, you can, the Danish cartoons passed by without a cough or a nod or a stir in Denmark until some asshole imam took it over to the muslims and spread the word there. Incitement to violence, anyone?

Potatoes, potàtoes.
Whatever the means, whatever the reasons, it got spread.

What's wrong with the boycott? It's their godgiven right to buy anything they damn well please.

Yes and no. We live in a free-market controlled world, remember. Boycotting anything is now a political means. It's also the US' godgiven right to buy anything it pleases, including not buying Cuban products, but would you say they're not making a political statement by doing so

And is it not the godgiven right of any civilian to make political statements?

I'm not talking about state-imposed boycotts here, though. As I already said, I'm not agreeing with anything some islamist governments are doing. Hell, I don't agree with *anything* that the muslim protesters are doing - I'm just trying to not judge all muslims for that.

Are people (such as me) boycotting certain products to protest against pollution, exploition and childlabour doing something wrong too, then?

Depends on whether or not you think pollution, exploition and childlabour are values to be held on the same level as freedom of speech.

You're really bad at making analogues comparisons, Jebus.

The anology isn't with freedom of speech here, it's with religion. They're protesting because they are hurt in their religious beliefs, not because they dislike the fact the fact that we have freedom of speech.

Well, I mean, they cross in this case - but it's still mainly about religion.

*EDIT* And don't even dare to quote these lines and take them out of context.

And if you're alluding to the 'generalizing' aspect - I've already covered that before. Them holding the Danish government and all Danish people responsible for the cartoons that newspaper published is indeed nonsense, but some people here calling all muslims savages because some are burning embassies is just as much nonsense.

Yes. And? We're not boycotting Saudi products. We're not calling a ban on all Middle Eastern products. We're not calling for them to be beheaded. We're not pressuring them to publish the cartoons too.

*sigh*

That's not my point.


Incidentally, many *are* calling for a Saudi product boycott.
I'm wondering where everybody will get their oil from nowadays, though, since plenty of people are already boycotting American oil here too...

The difference between the two attitudes is so wide, Jebus.

I'm not claiming that the West is acting worse than the muslim protesters here, Kharn. For crying out loud - at least try to get my point.

What I don't understand is why in Frith's name you think we should be the first to yield.

I don't want 'us' to yield. I love freedom of speech. I'd die defending it.
You're stuffing words into my mouth again, Kharn.

You're almost saying we're in the wrong here, that we started it.

Everybody is in the wrong here. 'We' are for not respecting their religious values, 'they' are for not respecting our society's values.
Again, I didn't say that the West is acting worse. Au contraire.

Fuck that. This is a stand-off in values, free speech versus religious intolerance,

How epic.

The exact words of Filip DeWinter, frontman of the Flemish Block, by the way.

And again: I'm not defending neither side here.

and you're basically walking around saying "Ho-hum, we shouldn't be so mean to them." What the hell? Then what? We should stop being mean? We should surrender our freedom of speech because they feel slightly miffed?

Fuck no, we should stand by our freedom of speech until the last breath we take and we should chop off every hand that strikes at us.

Yet, we should not hold the entire muslim population responsible for what some hot-heads are doing.

No major upcry from any muslim organisation has been heared in protest of the "Death to all Infidels"-statements of cartoonhaters - fact

Wrong.

Where's the bigotry? You're like a Jew shouting "anti-Semite!" whenever someone criticizes Israel. It may be true sporadically, but sometimes criticism is valid. Drop the typical European islamo-apologetic attitude and think for a moment.

People should drop the typical Western outlook of
35-year old muslim protester in Gaza = 78-year old muslim retired teacher in Java = 18-year old muslim computer programmer in India = the muslim next door.
One billion people can't be judged on the actions of a few. People can't generalize and call all muslims 'savages' because of what's happening here. Because that's racism.

 

[Kahgan]

*drowns in the ocean of letters*

By the way, the editor of the magazine that published the drawings in Norway has now officially appolagized to the islamic people...

Linkage

Yes, it's in norwegian, better hope someone wants to translate it...I'll take a rough outline:

"I am sorry that your religous feelings were hurt by what we did in "Magazinet" january 10.
I admit that I, as an editor did not fully understand how hurting the pictures were, I wish to apolagize for that to day.
I am deeply sorry that you as muslims have had your religous feelings hurt."

He added:

"The Islamic community in Norway has dealt with this in a worthy and reluctant manner. For that they deserve respect and salute"

I'm satisfied with this.