Shots fired outside Dallas conference on Prophet cartoons

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Baxx**

Hordini wrote:

You'd likely be hard pressed to find a more adamant free speech advocate than me, but the whole purpose of this event was to be inflammatory, disrespectful and provocative to Muslims, whether peaceful or radical. I wonder if the event organizers got what they wanted out of it?

I don't agree you can simplify it and that you alone can define what the purposes of others are or is limited to.

**cincydooley**

Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

**Baxx**

insaniak wrote:

The right to Free Speech was supposed to keep people free of oppression. Not to serve as a vehicle to promote hatred and demean those with different beliefs to your own.

And what here is hatred and demean? Shooting people or making art?

**cincydooley**

You're just being obtuse at this point.

**Baxx**

Automatically Appended Next Post:

cincydooley wrote:
I appreciate that you're using war time propoganda to try and make your point. It makes me smile.

I am using caricatures of military, political and religious leaders as a way to increase criticism. Not to let someone be so holy they can't be criticised.

**cincydooley**

Baxx wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

You are the judge of the purpose behind art made by other people? Please enlighten me how you came to this position. If I draw an elephant, can you be equally certain what was the deliberately purpose of it?

Yup. I'm that single person. That one judge.

Those pieces of propoganda art were created as propoganda art to serve a specific purpose during wartime, which I already stated.

You can argue against that all you want. It won't make you any more right.

**Baxx**

Ahh I misunderstood.

Those drawings do a have a value as art for people back then as they have today.

**Jihadin**

War time propaganda made by western nation that's directed at (Axis) western nations.

**Kanluwen**

Baxx wrote:
Ahh I misunderstood.

Those drawings do a have a value as art for people back then as they have today. People can enjoy provocative, hatefull and demeaning caricatures of brutal military dictators. I enjoy mocking art of any and all mass-murderers.

You're conflating an "illustration" with "art".

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

These people were idiots, but even idiots have first amendment rights.

One thing I don't get. Texas is one of the most heavily armed parts of America, and these attackers thought it would be a good idea to start shooting...

**Jihadin**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
These people were idiots, but even idiots have first amendment rights.

One thing I don't get. Texas is one of the most heavily armed parts of America, and these attackers thought it would be a good idea to start shooting...

They're from (drove from) AZ I believe

**Frazzled**

cincydooley wrote:
Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

Mmm but "piss Christ" does?

**Baxx**

von Hohenstein wrote:
Of course you should be allowed to draw cartoons.
But do you really have to do it for the sole purpose of annoying more than a billon people?
That's just ignorant.

In the land of the free you are not allowed to say "feth" on TV. You are not allowed to show a female nipple. And you are not allowed to say "kill the president". Allow that before you cry for "freedom of speech".
AFAIK it is forbidden in some states to teach Darwins theory - freedom of speech?

I don't agree that everything can only have a single purpose.

**cincydooley**

Frazzled wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

Mmm but "piss Christ" does?

Hah. I never said that. I think piss Christ is dumb as gak. But it pretty much anything can be labeled "art" today.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Jihadin wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
These people were idiots, but even idiots have first amendment rights.

One thing I don't get. Texas is one of the most heavily armed parts of America, and these attackers thought it would be a good idea to start shooting...

They're from (drove from) AZ I believe

Arizona's probably armed to the teeth as well. Hell, most of the south could probably supply the British Army.

**Co'tor Shas**

Nah, "piss christ" is bad as well. It's like this, I can call black people the N-word, but doing so will still get them angry, and possibly try and get back at me (through words or violence).

Edit: wow, triple ninjed, I don't think that's happened to me before.

**cincydooley**

No one is arguing that they can't do it. They can. But just because you can be a mean spirited, condescending donkey-cave doesn't mean you should be a mean spirited, can't news ending donkey-cave.

Perhaps you're missing that nuance.

**Baxx**

I think piss christ is brilliant.

Blasphemy is an important part of the history and development of art.

**Frazzled**

cincydooley wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

Mmm but "piss Christ" does?

Hah. I never said that. I think piss Christ is dumb as gak. But it pretty much anything can be labeled "art" today.

Then you have no point. if that counts as art, so does whatever stupid drawings they did. There are no art standards in the First Amendment.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

I can say kill the president or whatever

It's a federal offence to threaten a president. You could go to jail, even if you don't mean it.

- Clint Eastwood, in the line of fire.

**Baxx**

cincydooley wrote:
No one is arguing that they can't do it. They can. But just because you can be a mean spirited, condescending donkey-cave doesn't mean you should be a mean spirited, can't news ending donkey-cave.

Perhaps you're missing that nuance.

Would you say making mocking caricatures of mass-murderous military leaders is "mean spirited" and "condescending"?

**cincydooley**

I've never said it wasn't "art," Frazz.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Baxx wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
No one is arguing that they can't do it. They can. But just because you can be a mean spirited, condescending donkey-cave doesn't mean you should be a mean spirited, can't news ending donkey-cave.

Perhaps you're missing that nuance.

Would you say making mocking caricatures of mass-murderous military leaders is "mean spirited" and "condescending"?

Are you really likening them to spiritual founders of a major religion?

**Baxx**

I don't understand your question.

**Frazzled**

cincydooley wrote:
No one is arguing that they can't do it. They can. But just because you can be a mean spirited, condescending donkey-cave doesn't mean you should be a mean spirited, can't news ending donkey-cave.

Perhaps you're missing that nuance.

This I can agree with.

**PhantomViper**

Frazzled wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
Those drawings don't do a thing to "make the world better" unto themselves. They were deliberately created, as propoganda, to engender patriotism (to sell a product in the 2nd instance)

Mmm but "piss Christ" does?

I didn't even know that that was a "thing"...

The work was sold for $277,000 in 1999

**cincydooley**

Baxx wrote:
I think piss christ is brilliant.

Of course you do.

I love blasfemy. In fact, absolutely everything is blasphemous. Your very existence, your breath, your body, anything you think, say and write is blasfemous.

Blasphemous art has rocketed and excelled the last century.

If you say so?

Can't help but be reminded of the nihilists from Big Lebowski.

**Baxx**

It would help everyone to be more critical of authorities. And it very much has so in all of history.

**PhantomViper**

cincydooley wrote:

Are you really likening them to spiritual founders of a major religion?

Considering that Mohamed actually WAS a mass-murderer military leader I would say that that particular comparison was apt.

**cincydooley**

Baxx wrote:
If someone can be blasphemous, mocking mass-murdering military leaders, ridiculing dogma, blind faith and fanaticism, they should. It would help improve all of mankind. And it very much has so in all of history.

And in many of those instances, it makes them an insufferable donkey-cave.

Sure, that's their right. Doesn't make them less of an donkey-cave.

**Baxx**

cincydooley wrote:

Can't help but be reminded of the nihilists from Big Lebowski.

Yeah I love that movie.