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.

Why not ridicule both?

 Peregrine wrote:

Are you an artist who has been subject to those threats?

No, but if were I wouldn't be surprised if I needed police bodyguards for the rest of my life.

Baxx wrote:
No, but if were I wouldn't be surprised if I needed police bodyguards for the rest of my life.

Then why are you personally afraid of terrorist attacks?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Because ridiculing people for having a different opinion to your own is what started this mess?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Sure. You have any thread prior to the attack where we can discuss and ridicule?

Or do you use a failed assassination terrorist attempt to ridicule the victims? If so, I think that is very distasteful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

Because ridiculing people for having a different opinion to your own is what started this mess?

I thought religious fascism started this mess, but you're saying ridicule of different opinions did?

Sounds similar to opinions like having sex with same sex started stoning and beheadings of homosexuals.

 Peregrine wrote:

Baxx wrote:
No, but if were I wouldn't be surprised if I needed police bodyguards for the rest of my life.

Then why are you personally afraid of terrorist attacks?

I have it on good authority when one lives under this type of....."threat" one becomes harden towards fear. For fear is a weakness. We do not feed into weakness. We are not week. We can agree and all I want to see from you all is a north and south movement

 Peregrine wrote:

Then why are you personally afraid of terrorist attacks?

Not sure I ever ment I were.

Baxx wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Sure. You have any thread prior to the attack where we can discuss and ridicule?

Or do you use a failed assassination terrorist attempt to ridicule the victims? If so, I think that is very distasteful.

I had no knowledge of this event prior to the attacks, so that would be kind of hard. And I see no reason not to ridicule them. If a bunch of KKK members get shot at, I'm still going to ridicule them.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

I had no knowledge of this event prior to the attacks, so that would be kind of hard. And I see no reason not to ridicule them. If a bunch of KKK members get shot at, I'm still going to ridicule them.

Sure. But would you do draw attention from the attack to ridicule to victims? I think that's highly inappropriate. Why not do it independently?

Baxx wrote:
Sounds similar to opinions like having sex with same sex started stoning and beheadings of homosexuals.

Do you really not see a difference between a gay person just wanting the right to live their life without being bothered by anyone and an anti-religious cartoonist doing something for the sole purpose of provoking the "enemy"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Baxx wrote:
If you want to ridicule them, why not do it independent of homocidal maniacs trying to kill them?

Because people comment on newsworthy events? Are we not allowed to criticize people unless we have a forum thread dedicated to criticizing them before they become newsworthy, just in case we want to be allowed to criticize them later? I don't think anyone here would have had a different opinion of the cartoonists a week ago, so I don't understand what your point here is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Baxx wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Then why are you personally afraid of terrorist attacks?

Not sure I ever ment I were.

Then your talk of how sensible fear of terrorism is has been demonstrated to be ridiculous. In your case it's an irrational fear, and the "phobia" label is appropriate.

 Peregrine wrote:

Because people comment on newsworthy events? Are we not allowed to criticize people unless we have a forum thread dedicated to criticizing them before they become newsworthy, just in case we want to be allowed to criticize them later? I don't think anyone here would have had a different opinion of the cartoonists a week ago, so I don't understand what your point here is.

Sure I'm in no position to decide what others can or can not criticise. But if the criticism is irrelevant to the terrorist attack, I think it's irrelevant to criticise them in connection with the terrorist attack.

Baxx wrote:
You're speaking about the sole purpose. Is that an ability only you have? Or can I do the same?

Let me try.

The sole purpose of your text in this thread, is to provoke me and millions and others. The sole purpose of you participating in this debate is to spread hatred.

Does it work for me to dicate what your sole purpose is?

...

Are you really disputing the claim that the goal of the "conference" was to provoke and offend people?

 Peregrine wrote:

Are you really disputing the claim that the goal of the "conference" was to provoke and offend people?

Where did I dispute that?

Are you really disputing the claim that the goal of the your participanting and writing in this tread was to provoke and offend people?

Geller told the AP before Sunday's event that she planned the contest to make a stand for free speech in response to outcries and violence over drawings of Muhammad. Though it remained unclear several hours after the shooting whether it was related to event, she said Sunday night that the shooting showed how "needed our event really was."

She did the event after another event took place there it seems

When a Chicago-based nonprofit held a January fundraiser in Garland designed to help Muslims combat negative depictions of their faith, Geller spearheaded about 1,000 picketers at the event. One chanted: "Go back to your own countries! We don't want you here!" Others held signs with messages such as, "Insult those who behead others," an apparent reference to recent beheadings by the militant group Islamic State.

Edit

The Chicago-based organization event

Protesters, upset that a Muslim group was holding a conference at a Texas conference center owned by the local school district, showed up last night waving flags and signs telling attendees, “Go home and take Obama with you.”

The conference, titled “Stand With the Prophet Against Terror and Hate,” was being being put on as a fundraiser for a Chicago-based Islamic group, Sound Vision, and approximately about 500 attendees were expected, reports

Holding signs saying “You are not Americans. Don’t fly our flag,” protesters complained about the Garland Independent School District allowing the group to use the facility.

“We pay our taxes to that school, and I don’t want them here,” one woman, Lavona Martindale said.

Another protester, identified as Greg McKinley, said, “We’re here to stand up for the American way of life from a faction of people who are trying to destroy us.”

McKinley added, “If they want to live their life like the middle east, they can go back to the middle east.”

“I want for people to see that we are kind peaceful people,” explained conference attendee Page Spence. “We’re not here to fight, we’re not here to argue. We’re just here to show that we’re Americans too.”

A young woman, part of a group of counter-protesters, explained, “People are here to stand up with the Prophet against hate and intolerance.”

Police authorities beefed up their presence at the event following earlier protests at a Garland School Board meeting, where board members were told by one man,”I certainly don’t think you need people there who want to destroy this country.”

A spokesman for the school district said they do not discriminate against facility renters based upon religion.

I'm constantly shocked at how easy it is for some people to limit or define the purpose and meaning of actions done by other people.

 insaniak wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Because ridiculing people for having a different opinion to your own is what started this mess?

that is blaming the victim. She started it by dressing that way. He could have crossed the street but didn't so he clearly provoked them.

So at this point someone is arguing that the event was not inflammatory while at the same time arguing that having more inflammatory events are the answer?

This thread is starting to make as much sense as the event...

 d-usa wrote:
So at this point someone is arguing that the event was not inflammatory while at the same time arguing that having more inflammatory events are the answer?

This thread is starting to make as much sense as the event...

Pretty much.

 Laemos wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Because ridiculing people for having a different opinion to your own is what started this mess?

that is blaming the victim. She started it by dressing that way. He could have crossed the street but didn't so he clearly provoked them.

Bjorn popped to mind on this

Calling him a god was how all this mess started.

Still though. Geller group paid for additional security for her event of the Prophet cartoon drawing

 d-usa wrote:
So at this point someone is arguing that the event was not inflammatory while at the same time arguing that having more inflammatory events are the answer?

I'm not sure who's arguing what here.

 insaniak wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why not ridicule both?

Because ridiculing people for having a different opinion to your own is what started this mess?

Having people possibly ridicule your belief system is part and parcel with a free and open society. If your beliefs are so fragile that simply having a non believer question, poke fun at, or ridicule them is enough to incite violence, then there is a problem with the person being violent, not the people exercising their right to free thought/speech.

In other words, its not the ridicule that started this, its that one group thinks they are special and you are not allowed to ridicule them. Their feelings of entitlement to be the only religion no one can make fun of, as well as feeling entitled to violent reactions/threats/ect in retaliation is what starts and feeds the flames on this issue.

Be people christian, Muslim, jedi, and so on you have the right to practice your religion's beliefs (so far as they dont violate human rights IE no child brides even if islam or the bible says its ok) but other people have the right to comment/criticize and even ridicule your beliefs.

Christians get called out as loonies who believe in a magical sky god all the time, christ is often depicted in cartoons/comics that are blasphemous.

Muslims/Islam will just have to get used to how a free society operates and adapt to it, they are welcome to protest, write letters, start groups, or perform any peaceful actions they see fit to counter/condemn/control the depictions of Mohammad. But this pattern of violently enforcing their beliefs upon others is not acceptable at all.

The whole world is *not* expected, obliged, or supposed to become less free to adapt to the way Muslims/Islam want them to behave.

If they dont like cartoons about mohammad, they shouldnt read them. Maybe get a ratings system akin to the ones that warn us a program on TV has violence and/or sexual content to warn that a program might have possibly blasphemous religious content.

But this whole "we are gonna shoot anyone who draws mohammad" is an unacceptable thing to have.

So is anyone trying to justify this violence by claiming someone else started it, or was "asking for it", because they spoke their mind/expressed some ideas.

Baxx wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Are you really disputing the claim that the goal of the "conference" was to provoke and offend people?

Where did I dispute that?

Are you really disputing the claim that the goal of the your participanting and writing in this tread was to provoke and offend people?

Did you really just pull the "I know you are, but what am I?" argument?

I... I'm actually impressed. It's a ballsy move, I'll give you that.

I don't really know anymore. I am just shocked by how easy it is for some people to limit or define the purpose and meaning of actions done by other people.

I wonder how many shots would be fired if some Islamic cleric was holding a conference on the fine art of burning the American flag.

And if (well we will assume it was held in texas so...) when shots are fired, would the argument be defending free speech just like this events organizer is now claiming?

We can even look into this further, said hypothetical flag burning event was merely to stoke the fire and get Americans angry. Same way this event was made out to be.

I understand some dislike the showing of their prophet. I won't rub it in their face if they dislike it. It's just common sense. I may have paintings, posters and murals of this person, hell I may even keep a very Islamic anger inducing image of the prophet looking at himself while drawing himself. Nothing bad happens until I start coping them and air dropping them in mass to the middle east.

Seriously.

 juraigamer wrote:
Nothing bad happens until I start coping them and air dropping them in mass to the middle east.

History proves you wrong. Someone else might to the air dropping part. Actually, sometime not just air dropping your pictures, but also other, more inflammatory ones, because they just love the backlash.

Assuming no one is busy trying to shake the bee's nest, everything is usually OK.

 juraigamer wrote:
Assuming no one is busy trying to shake the bee's nest

That is a daring assumption. When does that happen, ever?

Remember that one time when people were drawing cartoons of Jesus and all the Christians armed themselves and killed a bunch of innocent civilians?

Oh wait that never happened. (Present time)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 juraigamer wrote:
I wonder how many shots would be fired if some Islamic cleric was holding a conference on the fine art of burning the American flag.

And if (well we will assume it was held in texas so...) when shots are fired, would the argument be defending free speech just like this events organizer is now claiming?

We can even look into this further, said hypothetical flag burning event was merely to stoke the fire and get Americans angry. Same way this event was made out to be.

I understand some dislike the showing of their prophet. I won't rub it in their face if they dislike it. It's just common sense. I may have paintings, posters and murals of this person, hell I may even keep a very Islamic anger inducing image of the prophet looking at himself while drawing himself. Nothing bad happens until I start coping them and air dropping them in mass to the middle east.

Seriously.

That correct answer is none and we would be supportive of their beliefs. But if you bring up Christianity and Jesus, oh boy you better watch out.

 pities2004 wrote:
Remember that one time when people were drawing cartoons of Jesus and all the Christians armed themselves and killed a bunch of innocent civilians?

Oh wait that never happened.

Sure it happened. Many times, thousands of victims. But the protest just continued, the injustice was increasingly criticised, blasphemy rocketed and slowly, church lost the iron grip of society. This is part of the process of enlightenment and development of democracy. Today, you can say or draw anything you want about Jesus. Not a single christian starts killing. And every single day, people are making and enjoying tons of anti-christian art. So that never again shall religious fanatics kill those who disagree with them.

Baxx wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:
Remember that one time when people were drawing cartoons of Jesus and all the Christians armed themselves and killed a bunch of innocent civilians?

Oh wait that never happened.

Sure it happened. Many times, thousands of victims. But the protest just continued, the injustice was increasingly criticised, blasphemy rocketed and slowly, church lost the iron grip of society. This is part of the process of enlightenment and development of democracy. Today, you can say or draw anything you want about Jesus. Not a single christian starts killing. And every single day, people are making and enjoying tons of anti-christian art. So that never again shall religious fanatics kill those who disagree with them.

Citation needed.

Edit

Current event time frame.

Don't bring me something that goes back to Crusades.