Danish cartoon and rioting

[scorpia]

Cartoons of the prophet Mohammed have outraged muslims

For some weird reason it reminds me of this site here;

We not only admit it, but we're proud of it, actually. It's part of the nature of most natural-born comedians. We want to piss off Prick Publications. Fundies are at their funniest when their inbred fears and paranoias are fed. They start to get all uptight, say they're "under attack", and go into their siege mentality. We don't expect Chick to end up like the Branch Davidians. I expect them to behave more like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson did a few years back, when hackers and crank phone-callers phreaked their phone lines and made thousands of phoney pledges. Chick will likely claim that his ministry is under attack by satanic forces or something. Of course, it would be kinda fun for them take us as a serious satanic threat. That would actually feel good. Imagine the power of humor -- a few parodies and satires make a fundy go over the edge.

So is making fun of some extremist/ fundamentist funny? Or is it about time people stopped throwing insults just so they can feel proud over their injured jaws that they may or may not deserve?

A while ago, when I was younger, I had left a bus to run into a group of boys throwing lewd comments at me, t6hinking it was funny. Their leader was yelling at me "Show us your ****!" at which point i walked up to him and punched him hard on the jaw. Yeah, i reacted violently, but was it so wrong? yes, I could have handled it better, but to be honest, I'd do it again. Did that boy deserve it?

[ST88]

So is making fun of some extremist/ fundamentist funny? Or is it about time people stopped throwing insults just so they can feel proud over their injured jaws that they may or may not deserve?

Of course it's funny. Humor certainly resides in poking fun at public/authority figures. These days, anyone who is quoted in a newspaper becomes a public figure and is fair game for humor. This is not even including the substance of their views, which is a different issue altogether. The same people who made fun of Clinton also make fun of Bush. It's just a question of what aspects of their public personae can be parodied most successfully. Humor isn't inherently polite nor can it be tamed.

Throwing insults is a different matter, unless they're funny. If you're just hurling insults out of frustration, then that's on you -- that's your failing (although sometimes it can be funny to laugh at the frustrated person).

Here's something else that is funny (just to show you how humor works):

A while ago, when I was younger, I had left a bus to run into a group of boys throwing lewd comments at me, t6hinking it was funny

It sounds like you were driving the bus, then jumped off just before directing it to roll into the group of boys because you thought that would be funny. I know that you didn't actually do this, but the malapropism was amusing.

[scorpia]

Throwing insults is a different matter, unless they're funny. If you're just hurling insults out of frustration, then that's on you -- that's your failing (although sometimes it can be funny to laugh at the frustrated person).

And these cartoons....... Are they funny or pure insult?

[Lotan]

And these cartoons....... Are they funny or pure insult?

Neither. At least not the one that shows Mohammed with a bomb in his turban (that's the only one I've seen). An editorial cartoon doesn't need to be funny, it just has to make a point. In this case I think the point is that violence is being commited in the name of Islam. If you disagree with that point then you might find the cartoon an insult but so what? People who are frightened of ideas shouldn't take precedence over people who are not.

[scorpia]

An editorial cartoon doesn't need to be funny, it just has to make a point. In this case I think the point is that violence is being commited in the name of Islam. If you disagree with that point then you might find the cartoon an insult but so what? People who are frightened of ideas shouldn't take precedence over people who are not.

I don't disagree with that point. There are things done in the name of Islam. Yet it is still insulting to all the muslims. I can't speak for them but I guess it is all about their leader whom they love which has been insulted.

It sounds like you were driving the bus, then jumped off just before directing it to roll into the group of boys because you thought that would be funny. I know that you didn't actually do this, but the malapropism was amusing.

I don't get it. What if it was your mother or sister or girlfriend/ wife who was recieving lewd remarks and jeers?

[Cathar1950]

It is done to other religious characters also.
I would hate to see that people could not express in harmless was with out others rioting. It seems like a weak God that needs defending.
I say the same for Jewish and Christians or who ever.
They make fun of Bush(we all do) but you don't see us rioting. They burn our flag, so what now they have to buy another one to burn and at least it is getting some exposer.

[ST88]

I don't disagree with that point. There are things done in the name of Islam. Yet it is still insulting to all the muslims. I can't speak for them but I guess it is all about their leader whom they love which has been insulted.

It's not even that. It's forbidden in Islam to portray Mohammed, good or bad, with an artistic object. (Some strict Islamic sects forbid any likenesses of any human form, e.g., Taliban.) There were no riots when Osama was satirized.

I think this is more representative of the general attitude towards the West since the war in Iraq. Many Islamic fundamentalists have successfully portrayed this adventure as an attack against Islam, whether it was or it wasn't. It was like building a pile of kindling in the middle of an oil field. All you need is one little match.

But I have to say, in the West, mostly, if someone disagrees with an editorial cartoon, they dash off a sternly worded letter to the paper. (this concept heard on NPR)

It sounds like you were driving the bus, then jumped off just before directing it to roll into the group of boys because you thought that would be funny. I know that you didn't actually do this, but the malapropism was amusing.

I don't get it. What if it was your mother or sister or girlfriend/ wife who was recieving lewd remarks and jeers?

Apparently you didn't get it. I was laughing at the dangling modifiers in your sentence, not at what actually happened.

A while ago, when I was younger, I had left a bus to run into a group of boys throwing lewd comments at me, t6hinking it was funny

[scorpia]

It is done to other religious characters also.
I would hate to see that people could not express in harmless was with out others rioting. It seems like a weak God that needs defending.
I say the same for Jewish and Christians or who ever.
They make fun of Bush(we all do) but you don't see us rioting. They burn our flag, so what now they have to buy another one to burn and at least it is getting some exposer.

But I have to say, in the West, mostly, if someone disagrees with an editorial cartoon, they dash off a sternly worded letter to the paper. (this concept heard on NPR)

Like the example I had shown above (not an editorial cartoon, but cartoons all the same).

Just a note thoug; I have heard mention of some riot when a movie called "the last temptations of Christ" was shown, but I do not know what that was about. That, and there has been rioting in Australia against lebanese people, to be fair.

It's not even that. It's forbidden in Islam to portray Mohammed, good or bad, with an artistic object.

Then it's blasphemy..... Or desecration....

I think this is more representative of the general attitude towards the West since the war in Iraq. Many Islamic fundamentalists have successfully portrayed this adventure as an attack against Islam, whether it was or it wasn't. It was like building a pile of kindling in the middle of an oil field. All you need is one little match.

And what if it was an attack on Islam?

Apparently you didn't get it. I was laughing at the dangling modifiers in your sentence, not at what actually happened.

A while ago, when I was younger, I had left a bus to run into a group of boys throwing lewd comments at me, t6hinking it was funny

*Notices the sentence structure and finally gets it*

[palmera]

Great topic Scorpia.

This whole debacle is unfortunate in so many ways. The publications of the cartoons in the conservative Danish newspaper are a reflection of the growing tension (and ignorance) between Europe and Islam. Perhaps the most unfortunate aspect of all this is that Islamic leaders have used the cartoons to point a finger at Denmark (and symbolically all european and secular society) saying 'look, they all hate us, hate our religion, and seek to belittle us,' while those who seek to denigrate Islam and Muslims have used the response of a few violent fundamentalist Muslim sects to point a finger at all Muslims and Islam as a religion and say 'look, we told you so. they are all violent and savage, just like their religion." Leaders of both parties have used the cartoons to demonize the opposition and fuel ignorance, proliferating hate mongering through unscrupulous and dishonest means, rather than engage in an open, civil discourse. It's not about free speech and anti-Islam, but about intolerance and leaders who weald the trust of their followers to fuel hatred.

Yes the cartoons were hateful and wrong (for starters they didn't even take into account that Mohammed's main response to opposition while he spread his message was the same as Jesus's on the cross: to pray for those who knew no better), and yes the ensuing violence was terrible, but unfortunately amidst all of this, ignorance continues to blossom and more walls are being built up between fellow humans. "Free speech" and "Muslims are violent" chants are a smoke screen covering up underlying social problems and a red herring distracting masses from engaging in civil debate leading towards understanding and mutual respect.

[scorpia]

This whole debacle is unfortunate in so many ways. The publications of the cartoons in the conservative Danish newspaper are a reflection of the growing tension (and ignorance) between Europe and Islam. Perhaps the most unfortunate aspect of all this is that Islamic leaders have used the cartoons to point a finger at Denmark (and symbolically all european and secular society) saying 'look, they all hate us, hate our religion, and seek to belittle us,' while those who seek to denigrate Islam and Muslims have used the response of a few violent fundamentalist Muslim sects to point a finger at all Muslims and Islam as a religion and say 'look, we told you so. they are all violent and savage, just like their religion." Leaders of both parties have used the cartoons to demonize the opposition and fuel ignorance, proliferating hate mongering through unscrupulous and dishonest means, rather than engage in an open, civil discourse. It's not about free speech and anti-Islam, but about intolerance and leaders who weald the trust of their followers to fuel hatred.

Yes the cartoons were hateful and wrong (for starters they didn't even take into account that Mohammed's main response to opposition while he spread his message was the same as Jesus's on the cross: to pray for those who knew no better), and yes the ensuing violence was terrible, but unfortunately amidst all of this, ignorance continues to blossom and more walls are being built up between fellow humans. "Free speech" and "Muslims are violent" chants are a smoke screen covering up underlying social problems and a red herring distracting masses from engaging in civil debate leading towards understanding and mutual respect.

Precisely