logo Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
2023-03-22 11:03:56 CoV Wiki
Learn more about the Church of Virus
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Everyone into the pool! Now online... the VirusWiki.

  Church of Virus BBS
  Mailing List
  Virus 2006

  RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
previous next
Pages: [1] Reply Notify of replies Send the topic Print 
   Author  Topic: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons  (Read 1632 times)
Blunderov
Archon
*****

Gender: Male
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.92
Rate Blunderov



"We think in generalities, we live in details"

View Profile WWW E-Mail
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« on: 2006-02-10 03:50:27 »
Reply with quote

[Blunderov] In an amazing scene at a local University yesterday, the
Politburo found herself subjected to completely unexpected attack by a
colleague.

The colleague in question is Jewish and has lived in Israel before. Some
desultory conversation had revolved around the cartoons and the
(forever-to-be-nameless) colleague had derived no small amusement from, in
particular, the cartoon which depicts martyrs being turned away from the
gates of heaven due to a virgin shortage. The Politburo then happened to
mention my view that 'offence is never given, only taken'(Hermit) and all
heads wagged in assent. Someone else then mentioned that they had seen a
cartoon in which Ariel Sharon was depicted as an SS officer presiding over
the ruins of Lebanon which provoked some mirth on the part of the Politburo.

An amazing commotion then ensued. The Politburo was suddenly subjected to a
screaming, sustained and hysterical tirade on the theme of the tribulations
of Israel and the difficulties in reasoning with Arabs. Apparently the
Politburo was, for a time, on the verge of being physically attacked by
someone with whom she has always been on perfectly amicable terms and who
had not moments before had been agreeing that such cartoons were quite
acceptable.

The emotions of the nameless one had had apparently been instantly and
completely engaged to the extent that it completely overrode her normal
circumspection. The "any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic" meme held
complete and very voluble sway over all reason.

Now that's what I call a meme! Wow.

I think it's worth noting that cartoons and political cartoons in
particular, usually take the form of a grotesque, that is to say, they are
often caricatures, exaggerations. Visual sarcasm if you will. It is the very
nature of the genre to stick pins into things.

I may be mistaken, but I do believe that the genre first arose at around
about the time of The Age of Enlightenment. (I'm thinking of Hogarth and The
Rake's Progress here.) And so it seems to me that what we are seeing really
IS a clash of cultures.

Me, I'm for the enlightenment. But I'm reconsidering my perhaps too
trenchant previous position of 'fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

It seems that sometimes people really can't.

Best regards.




---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
JD
Adept
****

Gender: Male
Posts: 542
Reputation: 7.23
Rate JD





View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #1 on: 2006-02-10 05:22:20 »
Reply with quote



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Blunderov
> Sent: 10 February 2006 09:50
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
>
> And
> so it seems to me that what we are seeing really IS a clash
> of cultures.

Converted at last!


> Me, I'm for the enlightenment. But I'm reconsidering my
> perhaps too trenchant previous position of 'fuck 'em if they
> can't take a joke.
>
> It seems that sometimes people really can't.

Since your story is implicitly critical of a Jew, I am surprised Mermaid has
not announced your Anti-Semitism!

My position is simple:

I disagree with needlessly insulting peoples faiths or other elements of
their core belief set, that is why I would not have published those cartoons
if I had been a newspaper publisher.

I think that the Jewish lady might have been rightly angry because of the
rank hypocrisy of Muslims and the sneering of Politburo's colleagues.

There is a long tradition of cartoons being a vehicle of anti-Semitism
(think of the Nazi's campaigns on this regard). That tradition continues
today both overtly in the Arab world, or more in a more loosely disguised
form in anti-Israeli cartoons one finds in the West.

These cartoons frequently co-opted Nazi symbolism (e.g
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/arab_news_041002.gif), attempt to
neutralise the holocaust or republish age old anti-Semitic themes like the
blood libel.

The example celebrated by Politburo or her colleagues - that of Sharon
eating babies - is a rehashing of the age old blood libel against Jews.

Here is the cartoon in question:

http://bareknucklepolitics.com/wp-content/sharon.jpg

Here is information on the Blood Libel Against Jews:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews

I can fully understand that lady's reaction. Politburo and her fellows
deserved outburst. If they knew their history, they might not have laughed
so merrily at just a cartoon.

Note that the Jews have been suffering this for centuries. It is the sort of
crap contemporary abortionists get from the Christian right that so many of
you detest passionately.

How about some equivalence now then?

JD


---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
Blunderov
Archon
*****

Gender: Male
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.92
Rate Blunderov



"We think in generalities, we live in details"

View Profile WWW E-Mail
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #2 on: 2006-02-10 06:53:46 »
Reply with quote

From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
Jonathan Davis

I can fully understand that lady's reaction. Politburo and her fellows
deserved outburst. If they knew their history, they might not have laughed
so merrily at just a cartoon.

Note that the Jews have been suffering this for centuries. It is the sort of
crap contemporary abortionists get from the Christian right that so many of
you detest passionately.

How about some equivalence now then?

[Blunderov] I take it then that you consider the Islamic rioting in response
to the publication of the cartoons a 'deserved outburst'? Is that sufficient
equivalence?






---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
JD
Adept
****

Gender: Male
Posts: 542
Reputation: 7.23
Rate JD





View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #3 on: 2006-02-10 09:08:21 »
Reply with quote



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Blunderov
> Sent: 10 February 2006 12:54
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
>
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Davis
>
> I can fully understand that lady's reaction. Politburo and
> her fellows deserved outburst. If they knew their history,
> they might not have laughed so merrily at just a cartoon.
>
> Note that the Jews have been suffering this for centuries. It
> is the sort of crap contemporary abortionists get from the
> Christian right that so many of you detest passionately.
>
> How about some equivalence now then?
>
> [Blunderov] I take it then that you consider the Islamic
> rioting in response to the publication of the cartoons a
> 'deserved outburst'?


The Muslim's anger is fully justified. They see the publishing of the
cartoons as a calculated insult and there is little doubt that is what they
were.

But peaceful protests and recourse through the courts and political system
is the correct response (like South Africa's Muslim community).

Violent rioting and lawbreaking, is not.

JD


---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
Blunderov
Archon
*****

Gender: Male
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.92
Rate Blunderov



"We think in generalities, we live in details"

View Profile WWW E-Mail
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #4 on: 2006-02-10 10:53:35 »
Reply with quote



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
Jonathan Davis
Sent: 10 February 2006 16:08
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons

> [Blunderov] I take it then that you consider the Islamic
> rioting in response to the publication of the cartoons a
> 'deserved outburst'?


The Muslim's anger is fully justified. They see the publishing of the
cartoons as a calculated insult and there is little doubt that is what they
were.

But peaceful protests and recourse through the courts and political system
is the correct response (like South Africa's Muslim community).

Violent rioting and lawbreaking, is not.

[Blunderov] By extension then, you must agree that the resistance in Iraq,
insofar as it is directed at the "coalition", is fully justified? The
response seems commensurate with the provocation in this case too. (Quite
clearly we need not be troubled with legal niceties in this instance, there
being no legitimate courts or political systems to which appeal can be
made.)


---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
David Lucifer
Archon
*****

Posts: 2641
Reputation: 8.95
Rate David Lucifer



Enlighten me.

View Profile WWW E-Mail
Re: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #5 on: 2006-02-10 11:21:25 »
Reply with quote

On 2/10/06, Jonathan Davis <jonathan.davis@lineone.net> wrote:

> The Muslim's anger is fully justified. They see the publishing of the
> cartoons as a calculated insult and there is little doubt that is what they
> were.

Is it really? Even if the cartoons were a calculated insult (rather
than the articulated purpose of testing how much the current political
climate is censoring legitimate debate), there is still an important
difference between "harm done" and "offence taken", a distinction that
has been known since at least the ancient Greeks.

> But peaceful protests and recourse through the courts and political system
> is the correct response (like South Africa's Muslim community).

So if I decide to be offended by your remarks am I "fully justified"
in taking you to court?

> Violent rioting and lawbreaking, is not.

Fully agreed.
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
JD
Adept
****

Gender: Male
Posts: 542
Reputation: 7.23
Rate JD





View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #6 on: 2006-02-12 13:31:50 »
Reply with quote

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Blunderov
> Sent: 10 February 2006 16:54
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Davis
> Sent: 10 February 2006 16:08
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons

> > [Blunderov] I take it then that you consider the Islamic rioting in
> > response to the publication of the cartoons a 'deserved outburst'?
>
>
> The Muslim's anger is fully justified. They see the publishing of the
> cartoons as a calculated insult and there is little doubt that is what
> they were.
>
> But peaceful protests and recourse through the courts and political
> system is the correct response (like South Africa's Muslim community).
>
> Violent rioting and lawbreaking, is not.
>
> [Blunderov] By extension then, you must agree that the resistance in
> Iraq, insofar as it is directed at the "coalition", is fully
> justified?


Since I rejected the use of violence in the case of the cartoons, I also
reject the insurgents use of violence per se, and especially as it so often
is deliberately directed at the innocent.

I have a broad respect for the nationalist insurgents and some understanding
of, and almost sympathy with, their cause.

I still want them to lay down their arms or be defeated.


>The response seems
> commensurate with the provocation in this case too. (Quite
> clearly we need not be troubled with legal niceties in this
> instance, there being no legitimate courts or political
> systems to which appeal can be made.)

Perhaps those papers you take have 2 year delivery time.

Iraq is a self-governed democracy recognised by the United Nations with an
independent judiciary and functioning courts.

JD

---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.churchofvirus.org/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
JD
Adept
****

Gender: Male
Posts: 542
Reputation: 7.23
Rate JD





View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #7 on: 2006-02-12 13:32:08 »
Reply with quote




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of David McFadzean
> Sent: 10 February 2006 17:21
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: Re: virus: Muhammad cartoons
>
> On 2/10/06, Jonathan Davis <jonathan.davis@lineone.net> wrote:
>
> > The Muslim's anger is fully justified. They see the
> publishing of the
> > cartoons as a calculated insult and there is little doubt
> that is what
> > they were.
>
> Is it really? Even if the cartoons were a calculated insult (rather
> than the articulated purpose of testing how much the current political
> climate is censoring legitimate debate),

I think they were that too. The editor of the Danish newspaper said he
published them to test just that (the extent of European media
self-censorship about Islam).

He made his point, and the Muslims have made theirs.


> there is still an important difference between "harm done"
> and "offence taken", a distinction that has been known since at least
> the ancient Greeks.

Of course! I was not suggesting for a second that there was harm. I am a
long-time campaigner against the excesses of political correctness and the
notion that offence equals harm.  It does not.


> > But peaceful protests and recourse through the courts and political
> > system is the correct response (like South Africa's Muslim
> community).
>
> So if I decide to be offended by your remarks am I "fully justified"
> in taking you to court?

You are fully justified is examing whether the law disallows a remark as are
you entitled to petition for blasphemy laws, anti-hate speech legislation
etc etc.

I am against all of it, and would fight it, but that right is yours (in a
democracy). 


>
> > Violent rioting and lawbreaking, is not.
>
> Fully agreed.

JD

---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.churchofvirus.org/cgi-bin/virus-l>

Report to moderator   Logged
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.62
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #8 on: 2006-02-12 21:22:54 »
Reply with quote


Quote from: Jonathan Davis on 2006-02-12 13:32:08   


I think they were that too. The editor of the Danish newspaper said he
published them to test just that (the extent of European media
self-censorship about Islam).

that would be the culture editor of jyllands-posten, flemming rose. quite an admirer and fan of daniel pipes, it seems.

bravo, indeed.
Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4272
Reputation: 8.95
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #9 on: 2006-02-12 23:32:41 »
Reply with quote

[Blunderov] Is it really? Even if the cartoons were a calculated insult (rather than the articulated purpose of testing how much the current political climate is censoring legitimate debate),

[Jonathan Davis] I think they were that too. The editor of the Danish newspaper said he
published them to test just that (the extent of European media self-censorship about Islam).

[Jonathan Davis] He made his point, and the Muslims have made theirs.

[Hermit] I suggest that any points being made are made far more effectively by the fact that Flemming Rose (the Jyllands-Posten editor behind the publication of the Muhammad caricatures), said that he would run cartoons produced for Hamshahri's (one of Iran's largest newspapers) "What is the Limit of Western Freedom of Expression?" challenge to produce Holocaust cartoons (in order to evaluate "whether the West extends the same principle of freedom of expression to Nazi genocide as it does to the caricature of 'The Prophet'") in the Jyllands-Posten (according to many news reports) but has since (reportedly) been overruled by his own editor.

[Hermit] Does the contest, Flemming Rose's offer to consider publishing the results, or his senior editor's repudiation of this offer speak to the question?

[Hermit] I suggest that the latter decision may be predicated on the fact that in much of the West, such cartoons will probably be regarded as illegal, not just in bad taste. Which, I suggest, says far more about press freedom and possibly about where the real power over the media lies (and this phrasing was exquisitely carefully chosen), than all the street riots in Islamic countries ever will. Street rioters and other thugs, irrespective of nation, tend not to be overly concerned about "academic issues" like "freedom of expression." Just ask any convenient neocon why Bush bombed al-Jazeera (though not in Qatar as first intended Ref e.g. Daily Mirror).
Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.62
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #10 on: 2006-02-13 03:31:51 »
Reply with quote

i doubt flemming rose's offer to publish iranian paper's jewish holocaust cartoons were made seriously. holocaust denial is illegal in seven(i think) countries in europe. no print publisher with half a sliver's survival instinct in them, desire to promote freedom of speech not withstanding, will permit this as it could possibly lead to arrests when those representing jyllands-posten(or anyother print publisher) while travelling to any of the seven countries. i suspect flemming rose made that offer knowing that the jewish holocaust cartoons from the iranian newspaper will never see the light of day in any mainstream europeon newspaper.

there has already been a proposal made in brussels to make holocaust denial laws(and laws that would make racism and xenophobia a serious crime) applicable for all of eu. freedom of expression isnt that free, is it?

Quote from: Hermit on 2006-02-12 23:32:41   
[Blunderov] Is it really? Even if the cartoons were a calculated insult (rather than the articulated purpose of testing how much the current political climate is censoring legitimate debate),

[Jonathan Davis] I think they were that too. The editor of the Danish newspaper said he
published them to test just that (the extent of European media self-censorship about Islam).

[Jonathan Davis] He made his point, and the Muslims have made theirs.

[Hermit] I suggest that any points being made are made far more effectively by the fact that Flemming Rose (the Jyllands-Posten editor behind the publication of the Muhammad caricatures), said that he would run cartoons produced for Hamshahri's (one of Iran's largest newspapers) "What is the Limit of Western Freedom of Expression?" challenge to produce Holocaust cartoons (in order to evaluate "whether the West extends the same principle of freedom of expression to Nazi genocide as it does to the caricature of 'The Prophet'") in the Jyllands-Posten (according to many news reports) but has since (reportedly) been overruled by his own editor.

[Hermit] Does the contest, Flemming Rose's offer to consider publishing the results, or his senior editor's repudiation of this offer speak to the question?

[Hermit] I suggest that the latter decision may be predicated on the fact that in much of the West, such cartoons will probably be regarded as illegal, not just in bad taste. Which, I suggest, says far more about press freedom and possibly about where the real power over the media lies (and this phrasing was exquisitely carefully chosen), than all the street riots in Islamic countries ever will. Street rioters and other thugs, irrespective of nation, tend not to be overly concerned about "academic issues" like "freedom of expression." Just ask any convenient neocon why Bush bombed al-Jazeera (though not in Qatar as first intended Ref e.g. Daily Mirror).

« Last Edit: 2006-02-13 03:36:43 by Mermaid » Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4272
Reputation: 8.95
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
RE: virus: Muhammad cartoons
« Reply #11 on: 2006-02-13 05:29:11 »
Reply with quote

[Mermaid] there has already been a proposal made in brussels to make holocaust denial laws(and laws that would make racism and xenophobia a serious crime) applicable for all of eu. freedom of expression isnt that free, is it?

[Hermit] It might equalize, if not enhance, "freedom of expression" if there were better evidence for the "Jewish Holocaust" (which is what I think those arguing for this mean (where the Jewish Holocaust is but one of the far too many examples of genocide)); if there were an intent to make this apply to all examples of genocide/democide e.g. the Russians in the Ukraine and Chechnya; the Czechs against the Germans in the Sudetenland; the British against the Boer in South Africa and against the Iraqi and Kurds in Iraq; the Americans all over the globe, e.g. against the Indians in North America, against the Moros of the Philippines and against the people of Iraq; the Israelis (with American support) against the Palestinian everywhere, but especially in Lebanon, Israel and the occupied territories; the Turks against the Armenians and others; or even if the "Holocaust" label applied to the Belgians against the Congolese. But this isn't the case. Not even slightly. It isn't even intended to apply to the case of the Socialists and Communists, Homosexuals or the Rom (or Roma) who all arguably suffered more under the Nazi's and their successors than the Jews did (and bear in mind that the Jews claim every Homosexual, Sexual 'deviant', Scientist, Socialist or Communist incarcerated or murdered by the Nazis for whatever reason as a "Jewish" imprisonment or death - if the person had even 1/32 "Jewish" genes (even if adopted by Jews who considered themselves as atheists!)  by whatever obscure passage - even where the person in question was quite unaware of their own supposed "Jewishness").

[Hermit] Personally, I would argue that the arguments proposing laws against "holocaust denial" are largely a smokescreen for the protection of Zionists. Laws which may well pass simply because few people with a career or a position dare raise a voice, for fear of being labelled with that least meaningful and most devastating label, an "anti-Semite" - or worse*.  As for racism (this concept is regarded as completely meaningless by geneticists, as variance within populations are much greater than those between them) and xenophobia (literally, a fear or loathing of guests or strangers) neither will cease if outlawed. I doubt that making any of these crimes will make them go away - but prosecutions would necessarily devolve into very selective lynchings besides public whipping posts; as no sane person could imagine that clear standards could be developed, due to the vagueness of language (what is race?) and variance in prosecutorial zeal (will a Professor commenting on social or genetic issues be more or less likely to be dragged into the dock than the agricultural laborer who has just lost his job and blames some group of immigrants?). So the nett effect will be additional protection for Zionists and a chilling effect on the speech of anyone else.


*As an example, according to a number of Intelligence sources, Jonas Savimbi, IMO (and not just IMO) one of the most enlightened African leaders of the 20th Century, experienced "worse" when he got in the way of an oil deal and was liquidated by an unholy alliance comprising the CIA, Angola's US oil supported communist regime and Israel's Mossad. Was it me who said conspiracy theories are bunk? Speaking of which, watch the NeoRepublicans falling over themselves to distance themselves from George VII's disastrously dangerous and increasingly unpopular policies - and claiming that this somehow proves that they are different and thus should be considered for election... I'm sure some Americans, NeoConArtists as well as the NeoConned, will buy this just as readily as they now agree that they were wrong about Iraq, but insist that they are right about needing to go to war with Iran.
« Last Edit: 2006-02-13 13:50:52 by Hermit » Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Pages: [1] Reply Notify of replies Send the topic Print 
Jump to:


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Church of Virus BBS | Powered by YaBB SE
© 2001-2002, YaBB SE Dev Team. All Rights Reserved.

Please support the CoV.
Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS! RSS feed