What Did Bill Clinton Say About the Danish Cartoonists?
I'm amazed that some of my smartest friends missed this one.....
Bill said what I've been saying.
Throw the bums in jail.
He said it here in Islamabad.
I do think Bill is correct.
Bill said what I've been saying.
Throw the bums in jail.
He said it here in Islamabad.
I do think Bill is correct.
posted by Wadena | 9:42 PM
13 Comments:
Well, I hate to disagree on this, but while it may have been a bad judgement call on the part of the editors to publish the cartoons, jail is out of the question. Liability for the damage caused by the riots is another question.....
I love to disagree (where would we be without that?).
:)
If we find it impossible to respect legitimate and harmless religious beliefs deeply held.....how can we hope to ever live in peace?
To refrain from making a picture of Mohammad harms no one. Making such pictures caused many deaths.
Jail would discourage similar reckless and silly behavior in the future.
"Says press should not be allowed to criticize other faiths"
somebody tell me this is a joke right?
No, Gish.....it is incredibly serious and it can have profound implications for world peace.
Clinton is a genius at statesmanship, if nothing else.
I too, used to condemn FundaGelical Christians and everything they did.
Now I realize that this is horribly wrong.
I now have vowed to criticize very specifically.....only the things that FundaGelicals do that actually and measurably harm others.
For example, their belief in talking snakes, worldwide floods and virgin birth is silly, but does no harm and makes them feel good.
Their persecution of homosexuals, Atheists, Muslims, abortionists, though.....is fair game for condemnation.
It is wrong, and should be illegal for a cartoonist to make an image of Mohammad.
In the example at hand, the reason for this is that Muslims believe it is a terrible sin to make or view such an image.....and there is NO reason to MAKE such an image other than to intentionally offend the deeply held religious values of Muslims.
As I said, I TOTALLY agree with Bill Clinton on this.
Glad you love to disagree! :-)
I think the cartoons exceeded the bounds of good taste (as I think any cartoon which lampooned deeply held religious beliefs would be). But I can't agree that it shouldn't be "allowed".
I'm a real believer in freedom of expression. Even when I loathe that which is being expressed (e.g. just about every time GWB opens his mouth).
I think the reaction has been completely over the top. There's no sense of proportion here. What would it hurt to have written the newspaper and said, "That was in really poor taste, it offends me, and I wish you'd stop it." and then let it go.
These are cartoons we're talking about here.
Cartoons? Simply poor judgement? Bad taste?
No, but your statement shows that you are having difficulty viewing this in something other than your own cultural context.
This is the greatest problem that Westerners face in keeping peaceful relations with other cultures.....our innocent ignorance and arrogance constantly undermine our efforts.
It is not about cartoons. It is about making an image of Mohammad.
Now read that again and try to see that the two things are indeed two separate and different things and thus escape the prison of your cultural and religious context.
Cartoons are NOT forbidden and blasphemous to Muslims, but making an image of Mohammad IS.
Now read THAT again carefully and try to escape the prison of your cultural and religious context.
You may not make it.....hundreds of years of brainwashing are clouding your vision. Very few Westerners can get there.
Clinton, however, WAS able to do it and I applaud him for it.
geez Wadena. becoming quite the outspken cat these days.
Just wanted to tell you I have been indexing the posts for Corruptco and will update as I come across new entries related to the theme. Also posted a list- some are 'maybes' busy bloggers who we hope to add this week if they can do it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dear Rhinoculous,
Referring to Muslims as "animals" is not allowed here.
Please refrain from open and blatant bigotry on my blog.
Thanks.
Wadena.
Religious freedom and free speech have, with the cartoon situation, seem to have come to an odd nexus. Does one outweigh the other?
Religious freedom and free speech both have limits.
The cartoons were obviously over the top and had no redeeming social value.....clearly the work of hateful bigots with no agenda other than to offend and inflame.
Well I would say rather simply that I would prefer to protect the right to speech including hate -than to restrict speech which makes an environment more conducive for hateful actions.
You know I do not comment censor, but respect when others decide to for their own reasons. I prefer to give others the option to respond to what they see as offensive, or ignore what they do not feel contributes. That said- Sometimes it is best though to let people speak for themselves and be judged accordingly. This is true on broad levels and this is true right in the limited world around here. Hiding hate doesn't make it go away.
My mind goes back to the comment conflicts, and the idea that if I were a strong woman I would protect 'the women' from trolls. I prefer to think that women can and do defend themselves, most are quite capable.
Lastly on the subject of Islam, I have only had liberals call them names for the most part on my blog, even going so far as to denounce political correctness where their evils are supposedly concerned. These comments were treated as reasonable contributions by the others though, regardless. Now we happen to have a regular who is islamic who took offense to that whole thread. Blog and let blog.
I don't care to censor much, Lily....but I will not allow the lies and brainwashing terms of the American media to be used here.
Calling Muslims "animals" was the recent one, but I have also had people who called Palestinians and other Muslims "terrorists," and that I will not allow.
This is not an American cable news brainwashing network.....this is my blog and I will not allow such lies and hate-speech.
Muslims are responding in self-defense in this war.....and it is a lie to tack the name TERRORIST on the weak who are acting in self-defense in response to the FIRST-CAUSE aggression of the strong.
So, if I see such lies and hate-speech here, that writer will find that he or she crossed the LIMITS of free speech and landed in the mire of brainwashing hate speech......and so their post will vanish.....as should all bigoted hate-speech.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home